A two-member bench of Peshawar High Court (PHC) comprising Justice Muhammad Ibrahim Khan and Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim on Wednesday ordered continuation of land settlement in Chitral and restrained the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa government from taking final decision in this regard.
The court adjourned further hearing in the case till August 2.
A petition was filed by residents of Chitral through which they have challenged the mode and manner in which land settlement is being carried out in the districts of Upper and Lower Chitral as per notification dating back to 1975.
During the hearing Barrister Asadul Mulk appeared on behalf of petitioners and Additional Advocate General Muhammad Sohail represented the provincial govt before PHC.
AAG stated that the government had spent over Rs35 billion on the settlement process of Chitral and the petition challenged the vires of that process.
He stated that in case the petition is allowed and rectification of the settlement record ordered, this will have grave financial consequences for the government.
And in view of this position the Advocate General, who was unavailable for some unavoidable reasons, himself wanted to plead the case on behalf of government and the case may accordingly be adjourned.
The 1975 notification issued in the wake of the Chitral Land Dispute Enquiry Commission report declares all ‘mountains’, ‘waste-lands’, ‘barren-lands’ and ‘pastures’ to be property of the provincial government without defining these terms or demarcating these areas.
In reliance upon the notification 97 per cent of the land mass of Chitral has been entered in the name of the provincial government in the settlement records.
Additional Advocate General Muhammad Suhail stated that the Advocate General himself wanted to argue the case as its outcome will have grave cost consequences for the government in case rectification is ordered.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 7th, 2022.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ