← All Case Highlights

Haji Abdul Mateen Akhundzada and another V. District Coordination Officer/ Deputy Commissioner, Quetta and 5 others,

PLD 2012 Balochistan 154 · Balochistan High Court

This case is about a dispute over the digging of a tube well (borewell) for groundwater extraction in Quetta. Some landowners started excavating a tube well without obtaining the required No Objection Certificate from the District Water Committee, as mandated under the Balochistan Ground Water Rights Administration Ordinance, 1978. Neighboring landholders (the petitioners) complained, and the Deputy Commissioner ordered the boring stopped since the land was unsettled and no NOC had been obtained.

Instead of appealing this administrative order through the proper channel (appeal to the Commissioner), the person doing the boring filed a civil suit seeking a declaration and injunction against the stoppage order, and the trial court wrongly granted interim relief in his favor, later complicated by revision proceedings.

The High Court held that this approach was improper. Under Section 56(d) of the Specific Relief Act, courts cannot injunct or interfere with public officials performing their public duties, especially when other legal remedies like appeal exist. The court found the plaintiff had no lawful right to bore without permission from the Water Committee, especially since the land wasn't recorded in his name.

The High Court accepted the petition, rejected the plaint, set aside the lower courts' orders, and sent the matter back to the Water Committee for a proper decision, while barring any boring in the meantime.

This case matters because it reinforces limits on using civil suits to bypass proper administrative and appellate processes, and clarifies when courts can or cannot restrain public officials from performing their du

Read the full judgment →