Saleh Muhammad v. Muhammad Ishaque,
YLR 2012 1891 · Balochistan High Court
This case is about a dispute over government-allotted residential accommodation in Quetta. Muhammad Ishaque, the respondent, was formally allotted a government house through an official order in September 2009, but Saleh Muhammad, the petitioner, remained in illegal occupation despite ejectment notices. Ishaque filed a civil suit seeking a court declaration confirming his right as lawful allottee and asking for possession. The trial court decreed in his favour, especially since the government authorities themselves consented to the suit. Saleh Muhammad, who had been proceeded against ex parte (meaning the case went forward without his participation because he failed to respond to court notices), later appealed, but his appeal was dismissed as time-barred. He then filed this revision petition before the Balochistan High Court, arguing he was never properly served notice and that the appeal's limitation period was wrongly calculated.
The High Court rejected his arguments. It found that court notices had been properly affixed on his house's door after failed attempts at direct service, which counts as valid substituted service under the law, and that he clearly knew about the case but chose not to appear. The court also clarified that the correct limitation law (Article 152) gave him only thirty days to appeal, which he missed by six days without any valid explanation. Additionally, the court held that since Ishaque was simply enforcing a valid existing allotment order rather than challenging an allotment decision itself, his original suit was legally maintainable.
This case matters because it clarifies how substituted service of legal notices works and reinforces strict adherence to appe
یہ مقدمہ کوئٹہ میں سرکاری طور پر الاٹ کیے گئے رہائشی مکان کے تنازعے سے متعلق ہے۔ مدعا علیہ محمد اسحاق کو ستمبر 2009 میں ایک باضابطہ سرکاری حکم کے ذریعے سرکاری مکان الاٹ کیا گیا تھا، لیکن درخواست گزار صالح محمد بے دخلی کے نوٹسز کے باوجود غیر قانونی طور پر اس مکان پر قابض رہا۔ اسحاق نے عدالت میں دیوانی دعویٰ دائر کیا جس میں یہ استدعا کی گئی کہ عدالت اسے قانونی الاٹی کے طور پر تسلیم کرے اور مکان کا قبضہ اسے دلوایا جائے۔ ٹرائل کورٹ نے اس کے حق میں فیصلہ دیا، خاص طور پر اس لیے کہ خود سرکاری حکام نے اس دعوے کی توثیق کر دی تھی۔
صالح محمد کے خلاف یک طرفہ کارروائی کی گئی تھی، یعنی چونکہ اس نے عدالتی نوٹسز کا جواب نہیں دیا تھا اس لیے مقدمہ اس کی عدم موجودگی میں آگے بڑھا۔ بعد میں اس نے اپیل دائر کی، مگر وہ اپیل میعاد گزر جانے کی بنا پر خارج کر دی گئی۔ اس کے بعد اس نے بلوچستان ہائی