Lahore (Web Desk): The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Monday put a temporary halt to the enforcement of the recently promulgated Punjab Protection of Ownership of Immovable Property Ordinance 2025 while hearing petitions filed against the law.
The proceedings were led by LHC Chief Justice (CJ), Justice Aalia Neelum, who heard petitions submitted by Abida Parveen along with other applicants.
During the hearing, the court suggested the matter be referred to a full bench and directed that all properties taken over under the ordinance be restored immediately.
Punjab chief secretary appeared before the court and was sharply reprimanded by the chief justice.
During the proceeding, Justice Neelum remarked that if the ordinance continued to remain in force, even prominent properties, including Jati Umra—the Sharif family’s residence—could be vacated within half an hour.
The court also questioned the absence of the Punjab advocate-general and was informed that he was unwell. In response, Justice Neelum remarked that she herself was not feeling well but had still attended the court proceedings.
Expressing serious concerns, the chief justice observed that the ordinance weakened fundamental rights and challenged the authority of the judiciary.
She questioned how revenue officials could be empowered to take over properties in cases that were already under consideration in civil courts and asked what objective the law was truly meant to achieve.
Justice Neelum pointed out that the ordinance allowed property surrender to be demanded through a simple phone call, leaving citizens with no legal protection.
Terming the law inconsistent with civil rights, constitutional guarantees, and judicial supremacy, the court ordered that its implementation remain suspended until the next hearing.
The ordinance, approved on October 31, 2025, envisaged the settlement of property disputes within a period of 90 days.
Under its framework, dispute resolution committees were to be established in every district, headed by deputy commissioners and comprising district police officers and other concerned officials.
The law also provided that appeals against committee decisions would be taken up by a special tribunal chaired by a retired high court judge, who would be bound to decide cases within 90 days.
These committees were expected to begin functioning within 30 days, with the stated aim of ensuring speedy justice for citizens.