' JUSTICE AFTAB HUSSAIN, (CHAIRMAN).-This order will dispose of S. P. No, 8/1, of 1981, S. P. No, 9/L of 1981 and S. P. No, 11/L of 1981 since they seek to challenge the provisions of Martial Law Regulation No, 118 as being repugnant to the holy Qur'an and the Sun nah of the holy Prophet M. L. R. 118 provides for nationalisation of most of the educational institutions in the country with the result that the properties which formed part of such institutions have also passed on to the Government without payment of compensation.
2. +he question is whether this matter is within or jurisdiction. A similar question arose in regard to vires of M. L. R.
115. This Court held in Muhammad Amin v. The Islamic Republic of Pakistan , that provisions of the said Regulation which placed a ceiling on ownership of land and provided for the acquisition of surplus land without compensation, were constitutionally protected and as such this Court had no jurisdiction to consider their vires in juxtaposition to Sharia. The Court held that only these Martial Law Regulations which were validated by Article 269 of the Constitution could be declared as repugnant to the Holy Qu'ran and the Sunnah. But provisions of Martial Law Regulations given protection inter alia by Article 8 or 24 were beyond the jurisdiction of this Court.
3. Martial Law Regulation is protected not only by Article 26) but also by Article 24 of the Constitution. Article 24 on the one hand provides that no, property can be acquired except by payment of compensation ; on the other hand it provides for exceptions to this rule. One of the exceptions is about any law which provides for the acquisition of any class of property for the1 purpose of providing education to all or any class of citizens. Sub-Article (4) provides that the adequacy or otherwise of compensation provided by any such law as is referred to in this Article, shall not be questioned in an' Court. According to the case cited above such matters are not within the jurisdiction of this Court. The three petitions are dismissed in limine PLD 1981 F SC 23