DISTURBED PERSONS REHABILITATION ORDINANCE, 1964

Key Provisions of the Rehabilitation Ordinance

Section—4

 Prior permission for
registration
—Prior permission of the specified authority for registration of a
Deed of transfer of immovable property by a member of the minority community
Section 4 has been declared unconstitutional. view taken by
The High Court Division—Supreme Court, pending the hearing of the appeal, stayed
operation of judgment of the High Court—Deed of transfer registered without
Requisite permission during the period of the operation of the judgment of the High Court
The court remained stayed—whether the transfer in the absence of permission was valid
— Constitution of Pakistan (1962). Arts, 6, 58, and 93, and Fundamental Rights
No. 13.

Ful Ghand Das and others vs. Mohainmad Haininad and others; 3BLD
(AD) 68.

Ref: 17 DLR (Dacca) 451; (1929) 278 US 515; N.S. Bindra:
Interpretation of Statutes (Sixth Edition), Page 592.

 

Legal Implications of the 1964 Ordinance

Section—4

Limitation—Limitation
In a suit for specific performance of a contract, when will it start? —Whether the
limitation will run from the expiry of the period mentioned in the notice by
the plaintiff to the defendant to perform the contract after obtaining the
necessary permission for the execution and registration of the sale deed from
The expiry of the Ordinance putting an embargo on the execution and registration of
the sale deed with permission—Upon true construction of the relevant clause of
The agreement would appear to allow the plaintiff to ask for the deed amicably
or through the Court, both after the expiry of the Ordinance and during the
continuance of the Ordinance upon fulfilling conditions thereof—Finding as to A
limitation that the suit filed within three years from the expiry of the
Ordinance is justified—Limitation Act (IX of 1908) Art. 113.

Rustain Dhali and others, V.C. Sekander Dhali and others; 7BLD(AD)15i

 

Section—6A

Forfeiture and
settlement after expiry of the ordinance, whether valid and legal
—suit
Property forfeited and settled by the Deputy Commissioner on the 27th and 30th
October 1969, respectively, under the Disturbed Persons (Rehabilitation)
Ordinance of 19, M, which expired on and from 1st April, 1969—Forfeiture and the
settlement was held illegal.

Alim Mohammad vs.
Tamizuddia, 4BLD (HCD) 71DRUGS (CONTROL) ORDINANCE (VII OF 1982
)

 

Rehabilitation Measures Under the Law

Section—6

Cancellation of the
registration of medicines—whether the licensing
authority without A
recommendation from the Drug Control Committee can cancel registration of
medicines—The licensing authority has no independent power to cancel the
registration of medicines—it can only do so when such cancellation is
Recommended by the Drug Control Committee, the petitioner is also entitled to
a show cause notice and a hearing before the licensing authority, before the
registration of his medicines is cancelled—without following these
procedures. The licensing authority cannot arbitrarily and unilaterally cancel
The registration of the petitioner’s registration of medicines.

Ruhul Ainin vs. The Director, Drug Administration and Licensing
Authority (Drugs); 7BLD (HCD) 182