Through this petition, under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 the petitioner claims that plot bearing No.1-A/25 Block-P measuring 1 Kanal situated in Model Town Extension Scheme was allotted by the respondent to Abid Bashir son of Bashir Ahmad vide order dated 24-7-1990. Pursuant to the above, the allottee after having paid the price of the plot and other charges obtained possession of the plot which was later on transferred by him to Robeena Aziz wife of Nasir A.I. This transfer was given effect to in the record of the respondents on 3-4-1993 with the result that the plot stood transferred in the name of Robeena Aziz. She after having the building plan sanctioned constructed a double storey building on the plot. Completion certificate was issued by the respondents to her.
2. Mst. Robeena Aziz transferred her right in the plot and the building constructed thereon to the petitioner through an agreement after having received the entire price and delivered possession of the plot alongwith the structure to the petitioner. On the basis of the said agreement the petitioner applied to the respondent to substitute her name as owner of the plot in place of Mst. Robeena Aziz.
However, no action was taken on the said application as according to the respondents some verbal orders have been issued by the Chief Minister, Punjab to not to entertain any application for transfer in respect of the plots allotted out of the Chief Minister's discretionary quota. This refusal of the respondent has been challenged by the petitioner in this Constitutional petition.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent was asked to produce any order passed by the Chief Minister or any other Authority prohibiting transfer of land by the allottees to the purchasers. He was unable to do so. Instead he stated that some verbal instructions to the above effect have been issued by the Chief Minister who is the Chairman of the Lahore Development Authority.
4. There is no law which authorises the Chief Minister or for that matter any functionary to pass an omnibus order without examining the merits of each case nor does the law visualizes a verbal order affecting the right of citizens. On the other hand, the legal position about which there can be no two opinions, is that there must be a written order duly supported by reasons. Consequently, the A application of the petitioner for transfer could not have been refused merely on the verbal instructions issued by the Chief Minister. The petitioner being the transferee from Robeena Aziz is clearly entitled to have the plot transferred in her name.
No order as to costs.