ABBOTTABAD: The Peshawar High Court Abbottabad Bench has ordered the immediate de-sealing of a commercial premises at Kalabagh in Galiyat and restrained the cantonment authorities from taking any coercive action against the tenant after finding that the sealing was not justified by sufficient material on record.
A division bench comprising Justice Barrister Mudasir Ameer and Justice Aurangzeb filed a writ petition, filed by Barrister Hashim Iqbal Jadoon on behalf of the petitioner, Sardar Hukam Dad.
The petition challenged sealing notices issued under the Cantonments Act, 1924, arguing that the action violated multiple provisions of the law as well as fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
Barrister Jadoon contended that the impugned notices were issued in clear violation of Sections 179, 180, 181, and 185 of the Cantonments Act, 1924, and also breached Article 10-A of the Constitution of Pakistan, which guarantees the right to a fair trial and due process.
The court was informed that the petitioner had been granted tenancy rights for a period of five years through an allotment letter dated May 6, 2025, and that he had complied with all terms and conditions without any default or breach.
Counsel argued that no specific violation of the aforementioned sections had been pointed out by the respondents and that the authorities lacked lawful jurisdiction to seal the premises, regardless of whether any violation had actually occurred.
In support of his case, Barrister Jadoon relied on the landmark judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan in State Life Insurance Corporation of Pakistan through its Chairman and another v. Director General Military Lands and Cantonments, Rawalpindi and others (2005 SCMR 177).
The bench observed that a prima facie case had been made out on the basis of the material available on record. The order stated: “It appears from the record that the petitioner is in lawful tenancy and possession of the premises in question, and at this stage no sufficient material has been brought on record to justify the sealing of the said premises through the impugned notices.”
Accordingly, the court issued notices to the respondents, directing them to submit their parawise comments within a fortnight.
As interim relief, the court ordered the respondents to de-seal the premises forthwith until the next date of hearing.
The respondents were restrained from taking any adverse or coercive action against the petitioner in relation to the subject matter of the petition until further orders.
