Dr. Saba Durrazai v. Chairman House Allotment Committee/Secretary S&GAD Government of Balochistan,

PLC (C.S) 2011 988Balochistan High CourtConstitutional Law2011

Bench: Syeda Tahira Safdar

Share on WhatsApp
2011 P L C (C.S.) 988 [Balochistan High Court] Before Mrs. Syeda Tahira Safdar, J Dr. SABA DURRAZAI Versus CHAIRMAN HOUSE ALLOTMENT C OMMITTEE/SECRETARY S&GAD GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN and 2 others Constitutional Petition No.119 of 2011, decided on 25th February, 2011. Residential Accommodation at Quetta (Procedure for Allotment) Rules, 2009 --- ----Rr. 6(4) & 11(3) ---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199 ---Constitutional petition --- Allotment of official residence to government servant ---Petitioner claimed that house in question was allotted in her favour, but later on respondent who was retired from service was allowed to retain the house in question for a period of six months after his retirement - --Petitioner had alleged that vide another order retention period was further extended in favour of respondent for a further period of one year ---Contention of the petitioner was that impugned or der of extension was made by authorities in violation of Rules and Regulations, while she being lawful allottee, was entitled for possession of the same --- Validity ---Government accommodations were to be allotted to the government servants keeping in view t he provisions of Residential Accommodation at Quetta (Procedure for Allotment) Rules, 2009 and under R.6(4) of said Rules appeal against order of the authorities was provided to be filed to the House Allotment Committee and petitioner was required to avail the same before filing of constitutional petition while she had failed to avail ---In existence of alternate remedy, no order could be made by High Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction ---Petition being not maintainable, was dismissed, in circumstances. Shah Muhammad Jatoi for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. ORDER MRS. SYEDA TAHIRA SAFDAR, J. --- The petitioner, being aggrieved of order dated 10-2-2011 of Chairman, House Allotment Committee/Secretary, S&GAD, Government of Balochistan , whereby approval has been granted in favour of Abdul Sattar Khajak (respondent No.3) for retention of flat No.C -3 (New), Wahdat Colony, Quetta, for a further period of one year w.e.f. 8 -2-2011 to 7 -2-2012, preferred instant petition thereby sought declar ation to the effect, that the mentioned Notification be declared as illegal, while respondent No.3 be directed to hand over vacant possession of house in question to her (petitioner). It is contention of the petitioner, that the house in question was allot ted in her favour through order dated 25 -5-2010, but through order dated 14 -10-2010 the respondent No.3 was allowed by the official respondents to retain house in question for a period of six months, after his retirement, w.e.f. 7 -8-2010 to 7 -2-2011. But after expiry of said period despite her efforts, the house allotted in her name was not handed over to her. Rather, through order dated 10 -2-2011, the retention period was extended in favour of respondent No.3, for a further period of one year. It is her (petitioner) contention that the order is made in violation of Rules and Regulations, while she being lawful allottee, thus entitled for possession of the same. She has prayed accordingly. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that as per r elevant Rules no further extension can be given to a Government Servant already retired from services, as such there is misexercise of powers by respondent No.1. He further contended, that as the house in question has already been allotted in favour of the petitioner, therefore, she is entitled for having vacant possession of the same. The petitioner is claiming her right on basis of order dated 25 -5-2010, while she is aggrieved of order dated 10 -2-2011. From perusal of documents placed on record, it is app arent, that through order dated 25 -5-2010 house in question was cancelled from the name of respondent No.3, while allotted to the petitioner subject to vacation, with immediate effect. Thereafter, through order dated 14 - 10-2010 the Chairman House Allotment Committee while exercising powers under Rule - 11(3) of the Residential Accommodation at Quetta (Procedure for Allotment) Rules, 2009, accorded approval for retention of house in question, for six months, in favour of respondent No.3. While, thereafter, thr ough order dated 10 -2-2011, the period for retention was further extended for one year, in favour of respondent No.3, by the Chairman House Allotment Committee. It is to be noted, that the relevant Rules in the matter are the "Residential Accommodation at Quetta (Procedure for Allotment) Rules, 2009". Thus the government accommodations are to be allotted to the Government Servants, keeping in view the provisions contained therein. In present case Rule -6 sub - Rule (4) of the Rules 2009 is relevant, which stat es as under: --- "Rule -6 (4) .--- Appeal against the order of the Chairman may be made to the House Allotment Committee which may, after due consideration, pass such order as it may deem fit." In view of above quoted Rule, an alternate remedy is available t o the aggrieved civil servant, under the Rules. Thus in the circumstances, the petitioner was required to avail the same before approaching this court through instant petition. Under provisions of Rules 2009, an appeal is to be preferred to the House Allot ment Committee, against an order made by the Chairman, who has to pass an appropriate order thereon. But in the present case, though the petitioner is aggrieved of the order of the Chairman, but she failed to approach the forum available to her for redress al of her grievance. Rather, she may have approach House Allotment Committee by way of filing appeal, which will be a legal course. Thus, in the circumstances, as an alternate remedy is available to the petitioner, therefore, no order can be made in exerci se of extraordinary jurisdiction. The petition, being not maintainable, is hereby dismissed in limine H.B.T./11/Q Petition dismissed.
This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error, let us know.

Related judgments

PLJ 2017 Quetta 58 (DB)

Balochistan High Court · 2018

Authority of Selection Board cannot be Challenged

PLJ 2018 · Balochistan High Court · 2018

Locus Poenitentiae--In appointment of Person

PLJ 2018 · Balochistan High Court · 2018

Iftikhar Chodhary's decision in a Guardian Case

PLJ 2014 SC 157 · Balochistan High Court · 2014

Leave to Appeal in a Guardian Case

PLJ 2014 SC 157 · Balochistan High Court · 2014