Mirpur Municipal committee Regulations for development and disposal of plots/estates 1985

  1. R. 3-Suitable physical planning and housing scheme shall be prepared if the piece of land was to be developed for the use as residential purpose. R. M. Asif  v. Chairman Municipal Committee Mirpur & others 1994 SCR 167 (A)
  2. R. 16 — Chairman may regularise the encroachments subject to the provision of master plan on any piece of Govt. land, rejected area in prescribed manner. Rehana Mahmood and 3 others v. Azad Govt. & 5 others 1998 SCR 82 (B)
  3. Under Regulation 16 — Only that encroachment can be regularised which originated prior to 30th June 1981 — Mandatory requirement that encroachment has to be proved by official record. Muhammad Adalat  v. Munshi Khan and 3 others 2000 SCR 83 (A)
  4. Regulation No.16 came into force in 1985, while the allotment in favour of respondent was made in 1974 — Therefore appellant could not derive benefit from Regulation 16, which does not visualise regularisation of any encroachment on an allotted plot — The said provision did not have the effect of cancelling the allotment made eleven years ago — Regulation No.16 is of no help to the appellant. Bagh H.  v. Municipal Corporation Mirpur and 4 others 2000 SCR 520 (B)
  5. R. 16(iii) — A piece of rejected place adjacent to a corner plot if allotted to another party definitely adversely affect the utility value and geographical topography of the plot of the respondents. Allotment in favour of appellant could not be maintained. Muhammad Iqbal v.  Mst. Maneeza Begum 1993 SCR 157 (A)
  6. A person who is in wrongful possession of land since 1981 may be allotted that land — Therefore, the appellant is a person who has locus standi to file a writ petition in order to challenge the transgression of the law by the authorities. Muhammad Sharif  v. Mirza Fazal Hussain and others 1993 SCR 88 (C)
  7. When the matter of allotment of plot was pending before the Revising Authority, Municipal Committee or its Chairmen were not competent to allot the same. Muhammad Farooq v. Khalid Masud and 13 others 1997 SCR 78 (A)
  8. Allotment from Prime Minister’s special quota — It was left to the sole discretion of the Chief Executive to allot from his special quota any plot to any person — There is no guideline laid down for such allotment. Muhammad Ayub v. Tazarrat Hussain and 5 others 1998 SCR 58 (D)
error: Content is protected !!