Islamabad:
The Supreme Court has ruled that the right to a fair trial is a fundamental right under article 10-A of the Constitution, emphasizing that due process must be maintained at all levels of governance and award.
“Due process is a previous requirement that must be respected in all strata. The right to just hearing and the fair trial requires that no one should be penalized by the decision to move away and afflict their right or legitimate expectations unless you are given a fair opportunity to respond to it and a fair opportunity to present/present the case of cases of properties of 11 paid to the justice of Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar in a case of a case. Case, one case, a case, a case, between a case, a case, between a case, a case, between a case, a case, between a case, a case, a case, to a case, a case, in one case, a case, in one case, a case, a case, a case, a case, a case, in a case, in a case, a case, in a case, a case, a case, a case, a case, a case, a case, a case, a case, in a case, in a case, a case, a case, a case, a case. The Evacuee Trust (ETPB) Board.
The sentence stressed that each citizen enjoys the inalienable right to the protection of the law and is in accordance with him.
“The determination of article 4 of the Constitution is to attribute and integrate the doctrine of equality before the law or the equal protection of the law, and no harmful action for the life and freedom of any person can be taken without the due process of law,” he said.
In addition, he noted that “the principles of natural justice require that the offender have a fair opportunity to converge, explain and compete before being convicted and convicted.”
The bank emphasized that the principles of natural justice and beautiful mentality are integrated into the philosophy of providing a right of hearing before a harmful action is taken.
“In our Constitution, the right to just judgment has also become a fundamental right by virtue of article 10-A. The principle of natural justice is based on cunning and the clear vision of offering a right of hearing before any harmful action is taken, therefore, it is a wireless obligation of all judicial authorities, quasi-judicial and administrative to guarantee justice according to the law of the law, the law, the law. the law “, what the law says.”
According to the case registration, the petitioners have been managing a business under the name and style of m/s. Yamin & Company. The dispute property, an open space that measures 16,481.35 square feet located in Wadhomal Odharam Quarters, Karachi, was acquired by the petitioners in 1974 through an auction.
The possession was delivered in two phases: 13,778 square feet in 1978, and the remaining 2,706 square feet in 1982. A 99 -year -old setback on March 28, 1992 was executed.
The lease had been executed by the ETPB, Pakistan government, through its attached administrator in Karachi, in line with an approval letter issued by the ETPB on November 20, 1991.
However, on September 17, 2020, defendant No. 6 issued a cancellation notice, claiming that the lease in favor of the petitioners was “false and false.” The petitioners responded to the cancellation notification and the presentation of the cause, but affirmed that they were subsequently threatened with dispossession.
Lacking any expedited or appropriate legal remedy under the Trust Property Law of Evacuís (Management and Discount), 1975, particularly section 14, the petitioners presented a constitutional request that sought to set aside the cancellation notice.
However, the Sindh Superior Court dismissed its request.
