2026 M L D 485

2026 M L D 485

[Islamabad]

Before Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, J

SAHIBZADA AYUB KHAN ABBASSI and 2 others---Petitioners

Versus

GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, STATES AND FRONTIER REGION

DIVISION ISLAMABAD through Secretary and others---Respondents

Writ Petition No. 1619 of 2022, decided on 10th July, 2025.

(a) Acceding State (Property) Order, (P.O. No. 12 of 1961)---

----S.3---West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act

(V of 1962), Ss.3 & 5---Petitioners seeking inheritance rights as

collateral successors of former Nawabs---Determination of entitlement-

--Federal government as competent authority to decide succession and

distribution of property of former Acceding States, jurisdiction of---

Jurisdiction of civil court to decide question of legal heirship,

inheritance and succession---Exception---Brief facts were that the

petitioners sought inheritance rights in the property left by the late

Nawabs, not as direct legal heirs of late Nawab but as his collateral

successors through previous Nawabs, thereby challenging order dated

passed by the government---Following the promulgation of The

Acceding State (Property) Order, 1961, the federal government became

the competent authority to adjudicate questions of succession or

distribution of property belonging to former Princely States---The

federal government, acting under these provisions, examined the

matter and rejected the petitioners claim---The background showed

that the late Nawab, acceded to Pakistan in 1947 and a subsequent

merger agreement in 1954 entitled him and his family to certain

properties and allowances---Held: Collaterals or persons claiming to be

legal heirs under S.3 of the 1961 Order had a right to approach the

Federal Government for determination of their entitlement in

accordance with Muslim Personal Law---Moreover, West Pakistan

Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1962 was to apply in

all questions regarding succession where the parties were Muslims---

There could be no legal impediment to the petitioners asserting their

rights of inheritance under Muslim Personal law before the

Government of Pakistan---In the present case, impugned order passed

by the Federal Government failed to adjudicate upon the principal

question of the eligibility or entitlement of the petitioners as legal

heirs---Petitioners had claimed such entitlement based on their

collateral relationship with the late Nawab, and in this regards, they were obligated to establish their genealogical linkage through a

properly drawn pedigree chart and supporting evidence---Further,

intricate questions regarding legal heirship, inheritance, and

succession were ordinarily to be adjudicated by civil court under S.9 of

the C.P.C by way of a suit for declaration---Federal Government was

bound to ensure proper adjudication of claims, while considering the

Islamic law of inheritance and its applicability---Impugned order did

not refer to any evaluation of determination nor did it conclusively

establish that the petitioners were excluded from inheritance---In the

absence of such findings no final adjudication could be made---

Impugned order was set aside and matter was remanded to the federal

government with the direction to proceed in accordance with law---

Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances.

(b) Islamic law---

----Inheritance---Limitation---Questions of inheritance are not defeated

by limitation and no limitation period runs against the assertion of

inheritance rights.

(c) Constitution of Pakistan---

----Art.199---Remand of case by High Court while exercising

Constitutional jurisdiction---Remand of case---Principle---Where

factual controversies exist and complete justice cannot be done

without leading evidence, the matter should be remanded to the

competent authority for a fresh decision after recording evidence.

Muhammad Mukhtar and others v. Muhammad Sharif 2007 SCMR

1867; Mst. Shahida Zareen v. Iqrar Ahmed Siddiqui 2010 SCMR 119 and

Muhammad Dervaish Al-Gilani v. Muhammad Sharif 1997 SCMR 524

rel.

Ashiq Hussain Tarar and Khalid Masood Rana for Petitioners.

Usman Rasool Ghumman, A.A.G and Zafra Khalid, Deputy Secretary,

Ministry of KA & GB & SAFRON for the State.

JUDGMENT

MOHSIN AKHTAR KAYANI, J.---Through this petition, the

petitioners have assailed the order dated 12.10.2021, passed by the

Government of Pakistan, Ministry of States and Frontier Regions, on

the claim of the petitioners.

2. Briefly stated, the facts referred to in the instant petition are that

the petitioners are primarily seeking their right of inheritance in the

estate left behind by the Nawab of the former State of Bahawalpur. As

per the stance of the petitioners they do not claim to be the legal heirs of Nawab Sir Sadiq Muhammad Khan Abbasi V, but assert themselves

to be his collaterals, being successors of his predecessor Nawabs.

3. After the promulgation of The Acceding State (Property) Order,

1961, the Federal Government and the Ministry of States and Frontier

Regions became the competent authority to adjudicate upon such

matters under Section 3 of the 1961 Order. The section provides that

where any question arises, directly or indirectly, between persons

claiming to be the heirs and successors of the ruler of a State or

claiming to succeed to the State, concerning the devolution or

distribution of the property of that State or the ruler, such question

shall be decided by an order of the Central Government.

4. On the basis of the above law, the matter was referred to the

Federal Government pursuant to the directions of this Court.

Consequently, the Ministry/Federal Government adjudicated upon the

matter and rejected the claim of the petitioners, giving detailed

observations, as reflected in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the impugned

order:

The learned counsel for the petitioners referred to some of the

petitions filed before the honourable High Courts and the

Supreme Court of Pakistan. In these petitions, it was contested

that the claimed inheritance was not based on being legal heirs

of Nawab Sir Sadiq Muhammad Khan Abbasi-V, but as his

collaterals, being successors of his predecessor Nawabs. He

further stated that despite the orders on the earlier petitions, the

honourable courts did not debar the petitioners from

approaching the relevant forum i.e. Federal Government in the

Ministry of States and Frontier Regions under the provisions of

the Acceding State (Property) Order, 1961. The learned counsel

for petitioners suggested that his clients may be awarded

property from other locations belonging to the Abbasi family

which were not yet mutated/disturbed to the heirs e.g.,

Shikargarh/Cholistan properties.

As per background of the case, Sir Sadiq Muhammad Khan Abbasi-V,

late Ameer of Bahawalpur, through an instrument, acceded to

Pakistan on 3-10-1947. This was followed by Bahawalpur Merger

Agreement on 17-12-1954. Through the Merger Agreement, the

Ameer of Bahawalpur ceded his sovereignty, authority and

powers to Pakistan. The Merger Agreement entitled the Ameer of

Bahawalpur and his family to allowances and private properties.

The Acceding State (Property) Order, 1961 was promulgated on

2-09-1961. Sir Sadiq Muhammad Khan Abbasi-V passed away on

25-5-1966. In 1967, the Federal Government appointed a

Commission to make inquiry and submit its recommendations with regard to the devolution and distribution on the private

properties left by late Sir Sadiq Muhammad Khan Abbasi-V. The

recommendations of the Commission were accepted and given

effect through the Devolution and Distribution of Property

(Ameer of Bahawalpur Order, 1969 promulgated by the

Government of Pakistan on 19-02-1969. The said Order, in terms

of its stipulation of 23 beneficiaries i-e. three widows, ten sons

and ten daughters, being heirs of Sir Sadiq Muhammad Abbasi-V

for devolution and distribution of private property of late Ameer

of Bahawalpur, has remained in force.

5. As per the observation of the Federal Government, the matter

regarding devolution and distribution of the properties of Nawab Sir

Sadiq Muhammad Khan Abbasi-V stood finalized, and pursuant to that

decision, the properties were distributed among 23 beneficiaries/legal

heirs, for which a Commission had been appointed. However, the

functioning of the said Commission presently stands suspended and is

under challenge before the Lahore High Court.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the

learned Law Officer representing the Federal Government, and have

been persuaded to consider the view rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme

Court of Pakistan in the judgment reported as PLD 1982 SC 367

(Government of Pakistan v. Brig. (R) HH Nawab Muhammad Abbas

Khan Abbasi), wherein the Supreme Court concluded the matter

concerning opening of succession/legal heirship disputes vis-a-vis the

properties of the State in the following manner:

The real question, therefore, which arises is as to whether the

Central Government had unbridled powers to distribute the

property in any manner it thought fit or whether it was bound

by any rule in determining the dispute regarding the succession

to the private properties of the late Ameer of Bahawalpur. We

agree with the High Court that as valuable civil rights of the

parties were involved, the decision could not be taken

arbitrarily but had to rest on some principle. The rule of

decision in the absence of an compulsion to the contrary could,

we have no doubt, be only the Muslim Law (Shariat). No such

compulsion exists as it has already affirmatively been found

that the contention to the effect that under the Merger

Agreement the question of succession is to be governed by the

law and customs of the State is untenable. The State of

Bahawalpur, as we have mentioned already, acceded to the

Dominion of Pakistan on 3-10-1947. Shortly, thereafter, the

Pakistan Citizenship Act was enacted, on 13th April, 1951 and

by the Bahawalpur (Extension Federal Laws) Order, 1953 (Governor-General's Order No. 5 of 1953) its operation was also

extended to the State of Bahawalpur and, accordingly, the

appellant, as also Respondents Nos. 2 to 23, became citizens of

Pakistan. Thereafter, pursuant to the Babawalpur Merger

Agreement entered into on 17-12-1954, and the coming into

force of the Establishment of West Pakistan Act, 1955, the State

of Bahawalpur was absorbed into the Province of West

Pakistan. On 31-12-1962, the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat

Application) Act, 1962 was enforced which extended to the

whole of the Province of West Pakistan, whereby Muslim

Personal Law (Shariat) the was to apply in all questions

regarding succession, where the parties are Muslims. In fact,

the Bahawalpur State had itself adopted in 1951 (1951-a-5-1

N_-)Q J.:; "l-U -9.it9)- Consequently, in deciding how the private

property of the late Ameer was to be distributed among the

heirs of late Ameer of Bahawalpur, the Muslim Law (Shariat)

was to be the rule of decision and ought to have been applied.

Indeed, the Central Government, while deciding this dispute,

which involved a question pertaining to succession to the

private property of the late Ameer was expected to apply the

same rule that any ordinary Court of Law would have applied.

The Central Govemment was burdened with the onerous duty

of deciding this matter only because of the special status of the

parties. In view of the high status of considered the contestants

it appears that it was appropriate to create a special and

exclusive forum to decide their dispute, so as to save the

distinguished members of the late Ruler's family from the

rigors of a trial before the Ordinary Court of the land. Apart

therefrom, the dispute, touching as it did the civil rights of the

parties had to be determined in accordance with the law of the

land which applied to such matters, viz. Muslim Law (Shariat):

7. It is evident from the above judgment that even collaterals or

persons claiming to be legal heirs under Section 3 of the 1961 Order

have a right to approach the Federal Government for determination of

their entitlement in accordance with Muslim Personal Law. This legal

proposition was duly recognized by the Supreme Court by reference to

the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1962, which was

extended to the entire Province of West Pakistan and provides that

Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) shall apply in all questions regarding

succession where the parties are Muslims.

8. Furthermore, the Supreme Court also noted that the State of

Bahawalpur had, in 1951, adopted the Qanoon-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat-e-

Islamia Act, 1951, thereby affirming the applicability of Islamic

inheritance law to such cases. Thus, there can be no legal impediment to the petitioners asserting their rights of inheritance under Muslim

Personal Law before the Government of Pakistan.

9. The primary question now arises as to what actions are required

to be taken by the Government of Pakistan. This Court is of the

considered view that the impugned order has failed to adjudicate upon

the principal question of the eligibility or entitlement of the

petitioners as legal heirs. The petitioners have claimed such

entitlement based on their collateral relationship with the late Nawab,

and in this regard, they are obligated to establish their genealogical

linkage through a properly drawn pedigree chart and supporting

evidence.

10. This Court further holds that such intricate questions regarding

legal heirship, inheritance, and succession are ordinarily to be

adjudicated by a Civil Court under Section 9 of the Code of Civil

Procedure, 1908, by way of a suit for declaration.

11. It is a well-settled principle of law that questions of inheritance

are not defeated by limitation, and no limitation period runs against

the assertion of inheritance rights.

12. Keeping in view the above principles and various judgments of

the superior Courts, particularly:

PLD 1978 (Lahore) 1166 (Khan Abbasi, Ameer of Bahawalpur v.

Govt. of Pakistan).

PLD 1982 SC 367 (Govt. of Pakistan v. Nawab Muhammad Abbas

Khan Abbasi).

PLD 1998 SC 1512 (Shahro v. Fatima)

PLD 1984 SC 67 (Muhammad Abbas Khan Abbasi Ameer of

Bahawalpur v. Govt. of Pakistan).

PLD 1985 SC 407 (Abdul Ghafoor v. Muhammad Shafi).

1982 SCMR 991 (Muhammad Abbas Khan Abbasi v. Deputy Land

Commissioner, Bahawalpur).

1989 SCMR 1182 (Ghulam Shabir v. Muhammad Sher).

1990 SCMR 1667 (Ismail v. Ghulam Qadir).

1991 SCMR 758 (Fazal Nishan v. Ghulam Qadir).

1991 SCMR 2050 (Sultan Ibrahim v. Muhammad Hayat).

1995 SCMR 868 (Zainab Bibi v. Muhammad Yousaf).

1997 SCMR 1081 (Anwar Bibi v. Raja). 

1997 SCMR 1352 (Ghulam Nabi v. Faqir Muhammad),

1998 SCMR 996 (Namdara v. Sahibzada).

2003 SCMR 362 (Mst. Ghulam Janat v. Ghulam Janat).

2008 SCMR 905 (Muhammad Anwar v. Khuda Yar).

2019 SCMR 417 (Fazeelat Agha v. Chief Settlement Commissioner,

Member, Punjab Lahore).

2020 SCMR 346 (Faqir Ahmed Khan (Deceased) v. Riaz Ahmad).

And the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1962, the

Federal Government is bound to ensure proper adjudication of the

claims, while considering the Islamic law of inheritance and its

applicability.

13. Though the 1961 Order is applicable to such matters and the

Federal Government (formerly the Central Government) is the sole

authority to adjudicate upon these questions, it must discharge its duty

by recording the statements of the petitioners and considering all

relevant material and confronting the claimants/legal heirs already

declared.

14. If, upon evaluation, it is found that the petitioners are collaterals

of the late Amir and entitled to share in the estate under Islamic

inheritance law, then a reasoned and detailed order must be passed

after duly determining their status on the basis of available evidence

and pedigree.

15. The impugned order does not refer to any such evaluation or

determination, nor does it conclusively establish that the petitioners

are excluded from inheritance. In the absence of such findings, no

final adjudication could be made.

16. This Court is guided by the principles of remand as enunciated

in:

2007 SCMR 1867 (Muhammad Mukhtar and others v. Muhammad

Sharif).

2010 SCMR 1119 (Mst. Shahida Zareen v. Iqrar Ahmed Siddiqui).

1997 SCMR 524 (Muhammad Dervaish Al-Gilani v. Muhammad

Sharif).

Which provide that where factual controversies exist and complete

justice cannot be done without leading evidence, the matter should be

remanded to the competent authority for a fresh decision after

recording evidence. 17. In view of above discussion, instant writ petition is ALLOWED.

The impugned order dated 12.10.2021, passed by the Federal

Government is hereby SET-ASIDE, and the matter is remanded to the

Federal Government with the direction to proceed in accordance with

law. It is expected that the Federal Government will fix a schedule for

the recording of statements of the petitioners and, upon proof of the

their collateral relationship with the late Amir of Bahawalpur and

visible rights in the estate, adjudicate upon the matter accordingly

within one year under intimation to this Court.

JK/153/Isl. Petition allowed.