LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) has ruled that acquisition of private land for commercial purposes without public interest is unjustified.
As per the details, Lahore High Court Justice Raheel Kamran Sheikh issued a detailed nine-page written judgment on the application of Olympia Chemical Private Limited to acquire 495 kanals of private land for the expansion of its chemical factory in Sargodha.
The court also declared certain provisions of the colonial-era Land Acquisition Act fundamentally incompatible with the Constitution of Pakistan.
The company had approached the Land Acquisition Collector after failing to reach an agreement with the private land owners. However, government agencies opposed the acquisition, stating in their assessment report that the application was made solely for commercial purposes and not in the public interest. According to the report, the company’s application to acquire private land was baseless.
The petitioner’s lawyer argued that Olympia Chemical, which was established in Pakistan decades ago, had earlier been allotted more than 274 acres of land by the Punjab government for its factory. On this basis, the company sought the government’s assistance in acquiring an additional 495 kanals for the expansion of its factory, citing the Land Acquisition Act, which allows the acquisition of private land for official or government purposes.
However, the Assistant Advocate General Punjab argued in light of the constitutional framework, particularly Article 24, that the application was purely for commercial gain and not for the public good.
In the judgment, Justice Raheel Kamran Sheikh stressed that Article 23 of the Constitution guarantees every citizen the legal right to own and hold property. Article 24 ensures the protection of property of citizens, stating that private land can be acquired only for public purposes. The judge further pointed out that the Constitution does not allow the acquisition of land for purely commercial reasons.
Justice Sheikh also observed that the Land Acquisition Act of 1894, which is a colonial-era law, can only be implemented in accordance with Article 268 of the Constitution. They noted that the provisions of the Act are fundamentally inconsistent with the constitutional guarantee of protection of property, particularly under Article 24.
The court further observed that the petitioner has failed to demonstrate public interest in the proposed land acquisition.
