Residence official |Supreme Court of Pakistan Ruling on Jurisdiction for Official Residence Allotment Disputes**

یہ کیس ایک سرکاری رہائش کے الاٹمنٹ اور اس کی منسوخی سے متعلق تھا:

**کہانی کا خلاصہ:**

1. **پیش منظر**: ملک سفیر احمد، جو کہ انکم ٹیکس ڈیپارٹمنٹ میں کام کر رہے تھے، کو پشاور میں وفاقی حکومت کے ملازمین کی رہائشی کالونی، حسن گڑھی میں ایک سرکاری رہائش الاٹ کی گئی تھی۔

2. **انتقال اور منسوخی**: جب ملک سفیر احمد کو پشاور سے منتقل کر دیا گیا، تو اسٹیٹ آفیسر نے 10 اگست 2011 کو رہائش کی منسوخی کا نوٹس جاری کیا اور انہیں رہائش خالی کرنے کی ہدایت کی۔

3. **قانونی جنگ**:

- **سینئر سول جج**: ملک سفیر احمد نے اس فیصلے کے خلاف پشاور کی سینئر سول جج کی عدالت میں مقدمہ دائر کیا۔ عدالت نے ان کے حق میں فیصلہ دیتے ہوئے رہائش برقرار رکھنے کی اجازت دی۔

- **آبپریلیٹ کورٹ**: وفاقی حکومت نے اس فیصلے کے خلاف اپیل دائر کی۔ آبپریلیٹ کورٹ نے سینئر سول جج کی عدالت کے فیصلے کو برقرار رکھا۔

- **ہائی کورٹ**: وفاقی حکومت نے اس فیصلے کے خلاف ہائی کورٹ میں سیول ریوژن دائر کیا۔ ہائی کورٹ نے آبپریلیٹ کورٹ کے فیصلے کو برقرار رکھا۔

4. **سپریم کورٹ کا فیصلہ**: وفاقی حکومت نے سپریم کورٹ میں درخواست دائر کی۔ سپریم کورٹ نے فیصلہ دیا کہ اس معاملے کی سماعت سول عدالتوں میں نہیں ہو سکتی کیونکہ مخصوص فورمز موجود ہیں جو Accommodation Allocation Rules, 2002 کے تحت کام کرتے ہیں۔ سپریم کورٹ نے نچلی عدالتوں کے فیصلے کو کالعدم قرار دیتے ہوئے کہا کہ مدعا علیہ کو مخصوص فورم میں جانا چاہیے تھا۔

**نتیجہ**: سپریم کورٹ نے مدعا علیہ کی درخواست کو رد کرتے ہوئے نچلی عدالتوں کے فیصلے کو کالعدم قرار دیا اور کیس کو مخصوص فورم پر دوبارہ سماعت کے لیے واپس بھیج دیا۔

سپریم کورٹ کے فیصلے کے مطابق، نچلی عدالتوں کے فیصلے درج ذیل وجوہات کی بنا پر کالعدم قرار دیے گئے:

1. **دائرہ اختیار کی کمی**: نچلی عدالتوں نے ایسے معاملے میں فیصلہ دیا جو کہ Accommodation Allocation Rules, 2002 کے تحت مخصوص فورم کے دائرہ اختیار میں آتا ہے۔ سپریم کورٹ نے کہا کہ سول عدالتوں کو اس معاملے میں دائرہ اختیار نہیں ہے۔

2. **قانونی پہلو کی نظراندازی**: سپریم کورٹ نے نوٹ کیا کہ نچلی عدالتوں نے قانونی پہلو کو نظرانداز کیا، خاص طور پر یہ کہ رہائش کی منسوخی کے فیصلے کو چیلنج کرنے کے لئے مخصوص فورم موجود تھا۔

3. **غلطی کی تصحیح**: سپریم کورٹ نے یہ تسلیم کیا کہ نچلی عدالتوں نے فیصلے میں غلطی کی اور اس وجہ سے ان کے فیصلے کو مسترد کر دیا۔

نتیجتاً، سپریم کورٹ نے نچلی عدالتوں کے فیصلے کو کالعدم قرار دیا اور معاملہ واپس کرنے کی ہدایت دی تاکہ مدعا علیہ کو مناسب فورم میں اپنے کیس کی سماعت کروانے کا موقع مل سکے۔

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

PRESENT:

Mr. Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan

Mr. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail

Civil Petition No. 361-P of 2018

Govt. of Pakistan M/O Housing & Works through

Joint Estate Officer, Federal Government Colony

Hassan Ghari, Peshawar

…Petitioner

Versus

Malik Safeer Ahmed

…Respondent

For the Petitioner

Mr. Amir Javed, Addl. AGP

For the Respondent

Mr. Abdul Munim, ASC

Date of hearing

18.08.2022

JUDGMENT

Jamal Khan Mandokhail, J.- The respondent was

serving in the Income Tax Department, Government of

Pakistan and was posted at Peshawar. He was allotted an

official residence in the Federal Government Employees

Housing Colony, Hassan Garhi, Peshawar. Upon his transfer

from Peshawar, the Estate Officer cancelled the allotment vide

notice/letter dated 10th of August 2011, and directed the

respondent to vacate the official residence (the residence).

Being aggrieved, the respondent filed a civil suit in the Court

of Senior Civil Judge, Peshawar, which was decreed in his

favour. The petitioner filed an appeal and a civil revision, both

of which were dismissed by the Appellate Court and the High

Court respectively, hence, this petition for leave to appeal.

Civil Petition No. 361-P of 2018

The learned Additional Attorney General of Pakistan

(AAG) stated that on the recommendation of the Federal

Government, the President of Pakistan in exercise of the

powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 25 of the Civil

Servants Act, 1973 (LXXI of 1973) (the Act of 1973) made

the Accommodation Allocation Rules, 2002 (the Rules 2002),

wherein a remedy has been provided to an aggrieved person.

He stated that the order of cancellation was passed by the

competent authority by exercising power under the Rules

2002, therefore, the Senior Civil Judge has wrongly assumed

the jurisdiction. On merits, the learned AAG contended that

the respondent after his transfer from Peshawar, was not

entitled to retain the residence, but the courts below did not

consider this aspect of the case as well and have permitted

him to retain the same, without taking into account Rule 15

of the Rules 2002.

The learned counsel for the respondent opposed the

contention on legal as well as on factual grounds. He stated

that no question of law of public importance has been raised

through the instant petition against the concurrent findings

of fact of three courts below, therefore, the same is liable to be

dismissed.

Arguments heard and have perused the record. It is a

fact that as a policy, the Governments (Federal and

Provincial), within their available resources, provide basic

necessities of life, including housing to the persons in service

of Pakistan. Consequently, the Federal and Provincial

Governments, autonomous, semi-autonomous bodies,

authorities, corporations etc., respectively, own their own

official residences in limited number, for allotment of the

same to their officials and employees, subject to availability of

the accommodation. The allotment to official(s) is made in

Civil Petition No. 361-P of 2018

accordance with his/their respective applicable rules,

regulations, policies, instructions or directions issued in this

behalf from time to time by the authorities concerned,

determining the mechanism, eligibility criteria, terms and

conditions, and defines the authority to allot and cancel the

allotment of an official accommodation. They also provide a

remedy to an aggrieved person for redressal of his/her

grievance, if an order for allotment or cancellation is made by

an officer in respect of an official accommodation, in violation

of the applicable terms and conditions. Upon allotment of an

official accommodation to an official, his/her monthly house

rent allowance, being paid to him/her along with monthly

salary is discontinued and is adjusted towards the rent of the

said accommodation. As such, the matter of allotment or

cancellation of an official residence is connected with the

terms and conditions of the service of the persons in the

service of Pakistan, in public service and other officials of the

concerned government, autonomous, semi-autonomous

bodies, authorities, corporations etc.

Any order of allotment or cancellation thereof, in respect

of an official accommodation is to be made by an authorized

officer in accordance with the terms and conditions of their

respective applicable rules, regulations, policies, instructions,

directions etc., subject to the availability of the official

accommodation. If any person is aggrieved from any order

made or proceedings taken by an authorized officer in respect

of an official accommodation, can avail the remedies, provided

by the relevant applicable rules, regulations, policies,

instructions, directions etc., for redressal of his/her

grievance. Since, no serious question of facts normally

involves in the matter of allotment or cancellation of an

official accommodation, therefore, the said forums, having all

the powers to consider the vires of any order made or

proceedings taken by an officer, could rectify the error and

resolve the disputes on the basis of the available material, in

accordance with the applicable rules, regulations, policies,

instructions, directions etc. One of the purposes of

establishing a separate forum is to proceed with the matters

pertaining to the official accommodation summarily, and to

resolve the issue in a shortest possible time, in order to avoid

the procrastinated litigation. Under such circumstances, any

order made or proceedings taken in respect of an official

accommodation,

pursuant to the applicable rules,

regulations, policies, instructions, directions etc., shall not be

called in question before any court, except the forums

provided therein. However, if such forum is not provided, a

High Court may, if it is satisfied, exercise its power, as

provided by Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic

Republic of Pakistan, 1973.

In the case in hand, the respondent is an official of the

Federal Government, to whom the official accommodation was

allotted and was subsequently cancelled through an order

made by an officer authorized by the Rules 2002. Under

Section 23B of the Act of 1973, no order made or proceedings

taken under the Rules could be called in question in any

court and no injunction shall be granted by any court in

respect of any decision made, or proceedings taken in

pursuance of any power conferred by, or under the rules

made thereunder. Since the order of cancellation was made

by an authority, exercising power under the Rules 2002

framed under the Act of 1973, therefore, it could have been

called in question in the forum, provided by the Rules 2002.

The respondent, feeling aggrieved from the order of

cancellation of allotment of his official accommodation, made

by an authorized officer in pursuance of the power conferred

upon him by the Rules 2002, instead of availing the remedy

provided by the Rules 2002, approached the civil court which

Civil Petition No. 361-P of 2018

had no jurisdiction in the matter. Under such circumstances,

the judgment and decree passed by the trial court were void.

The appellate court as well as the High Court have failed to

consider this legal aspect of the case and have come to a

wrong conclusion by maintaining the judgment and decree of

the trial court, hence, committed an illegality.

Thus, in view of the above, this petition is converted into

appeal and is allowed. The impugned judgment passed by the

High Court and the judgments and decrees of the Courts

below are set aside. The Trial Court, having no jurisdiction in

the matter, should return the plaint along with annexures to

the respondent.

Copies of the judgment be transmitted to the Registrars

of the respective High Courts, to the petitioner and the Chief

Secretaries of the Provinces.

Judge

2022 SCMR 2073

For more information call us 0092-324-4010279 Whatsapp Dear readers if u like this post plz comments and follow us. Thanks for reading .as you know our goal is to aware people of their rights and how can get their rights. we will answer every question, so we need your help to achieve our goal. plz tell people about this blog and subscribe to our youtube channel and follow us at the end of this post.