The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Monday set aside all decisions issued by Dispute Resolution Committees (DRCs) in cases related to alleged illegal occupations under the Punjab Property Ownership Law, while transferring more than 1,500 pending petitions to the relevant tribunals for fresh proceedings.
The order was issued by a three-member full bench headed by LHC Chief Justice Aalia Neelam, with Justice Jawad Zafar and Justice Abher Gul Khan as members.
During the hearing, Advocate General Punjab Amjad Pervez informed the court that substantial amendments had been introduced to the Punjab Property Ownership Law through a newly promulgated amendment ordinance while the petitions were pending.
He explained that under the amended ordinance, judicial powers have been withdrawn from DRC committees, a biometric system has been introduced for lodging complaints, and authority has been shifted from the executive to specialized tribunals. He added that serving Additional Sessions Judges will now be appointed to the tribunals instead of retired judges, and the tribunals will be legally bound to decide cases within 30 days.
The court was further told that if a matter is already under adjudication before any court, the complainant may seek transfer of the case to a tribunal. The concerned court, after examining the record, will decide whether the case should be transferred. It was also clarified that parties aggrieved by tribunal decisions will have the right to approach constitutional courts, including the Supreme Court of Pakistan or the High Court.
Chief Justice Aalia Neelam observed that the law had undergone clear and substantive changes, adding that petitions challenging the constitutionality of the law would be taken up at a later stage. Subsequently, the court declared all actions and decisions of the DRC committees void, directed the transfer of all pending petitions to the tribunals, and instructed that the cases be heard and decided strictly in accordance with the amended ordinance and the law.
Separately, the LHC on Monday expressed serious concern over the non-constitution of the authority envisaged under Section 2-A of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) 2016, noting that under temporary arrangements the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority is currently performing its functions.
The court also sought a comprehensive report from the Federal Interior Secretary, explaining the present status of the authority, the reasons for delay in its establishment, and the legal justification for the prolonged transitional arrangement.
Justice Ali Zia Bajwa passed these orders while hearing a petition filed by lawyer Chaudhry Pervez Elahi Bhaddar, who challenged an alleged character assassination campaign on social media targeting female judges of the high court.
During the proceedings, the Director of National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) Punjab admitted that no modern technological tools are presently being used to detect illegal online content.
At this, the court observed that it was alarming for a specialized cybercrime investigation body to operate without basic contemporary forensic and technological resources.
In view of the evolving and highly technical nature of cybercrime, the court decided to seek expert assistance and directed the Chairman of the Punjab Information Technology Board to appear as amicus curiae. The PITB chairman has been asked to assist the court on the availability and feasibility of modern tools for monitoring, detecting, and tracing unlawful online material, as well as to brief the court on international best practices and existing technological frameworks in Pakistan. The court also indicated that an independent cybercrime expert could be appointed, if required.
The court further sought fresh and detailed reports from the PTA and NCCIA regarding any public awareness campaigns conducted to counter contemptuous material against the judiciary. The Chairman PTA has been directed to depute a senior, well-versed officer to assist the court at the next hearing. The court noted with concern that NCCIA’s submitted report revealed no effective action against individuals allegedly running an organized campaign against the judiciary on social media. Observing a lack of meaningful investigation and progress, the court directed the Director General NCCIA to appear in person at the next hearing with a detailed report explaining steps taken so far, reasons for inaction or delay, and a concrete future course of action.
The court warned that dereliction of statutory duty by public authorities carries legal consequences and that any wilful failure to act in accordance with the law would invite action under the applicable legal framework.
Subsequently, the court adjourned further proceedings till February 25.