IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION) 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE GULZAR AHMED. 
MR. JUSTICE FAISAL ARAB. 
MR. JUSTICE IJAZ UL AHSAN. 
 
CIVIL APPEAL NO.1459 OF 2018.  
Against judgment dated 13.09.2018 of Peshawar High Court, Peshawar, 
passed in Writ Petition No.4125-P of 2017. 
 
Riffat Shaheen.  
 
 
 
 
  …Appellant(s) 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
The Government of KPK through  
Chief Secretary, Peshawar and others.  
 
 
 
  
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
For the appellant(s):  Mr. Nasir Mehmood, ASC 
 
 
 
 
Mr. M. S. Khattak, AOR 
 
For the respondent(s): Barrister Qasim Wadood, Addl.AG, KP 
 
 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing:  
07.03.2019. 
 
O R D E R   
 
 
Ijaz ul Ahsan, J-. The petitioner seeks leave to 
appeal against a judgment of the Peshawar High Court, 
Peshawar, 
dated 
13.09.2018. 
Through 
the 
impugned 
judgment, a constitutional petition filed by the petitioner was 
dismissed.  
2. 
 
The brief facts necessary for decision of this lis are 
that the petitioner was appointed as a PTC Teacher on 
04.10.1985 and has been residing with her husband in a 
government accommodation (Quarter No.26-B, Officers Block, 
GRC, Kohat Road, Peshawar). He was working as an Assistant 
Director, KPK TEVTA. He retired on 01.04.2017. After expiry of 
CIVIL APPEAL NO.1459 OF 2018.  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
six months’ grace period, the Respondents issued a vacation 
notice dated 29.09.2017. The petitioner applied for transfer of 
the quarter in her name on 01.08.2017 under Rule 4 of the 
KPK Residential Accommodation at Peshawar (Procedure for 
Allotment) Rules, 1980 (‘the Rules, 1980’). Her request was 
not acceded to. In the meantime, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 
Buildings (Management, Control and Allotment) Act, 2018 
(“the Act”) was promulgated which repealed and substituted 
the previous Rules. Consequently, the petitioner’s application 
was not accepted which prompted her to approach the High 
Court 
in 
its 
constitutional 
jurisdiction. 
However 
her 
constitutional petition also did not succeed. Hence, this 
petition.  
3. 
 
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that 
under the Rules, 1980 a vested right had accrued in her favour 
which could not be taken away through a subsequent change 
in law/rules. He further maintains that the Act, 2018 and the 
Rules framed thereunder were promulgated on 22.01.2018 and 
the same could not be given retrospective effect. He maintains 
that the High Court has erred in law in applying and 
interpreting the relevant laws and has exercised jurisdiction in 
a perverse and erroneous manner.  
4. 
 
The learned Additional Advocate General, Khyber 
Pakhtunkhwa has defended the impugned judgment. He 
submits that the case of the petitioner was governed under the 
CIVIL APPEAL NO.1459 OF 2018.  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Rules, 2015 which were struck down by the learned High 
Court. It had been observed by the High Court that out of turn 
allotments were required to be prohibited by the law and the 
Rules. He maintains that the Act, 2018 was promulgated in 
light of the judgment of the High Court and gave effect to the 
same. He further submits that a special quota for children and 
spouses of the deceased/retired employees has been provided 
in the new law. At present, the petitioner appears at Sr.No.13 
of the waiting list under the said quota. As soon as 
accommodation becomes available she would be entitled to the 
same in accordance with her seniority under the said quota.  
5. 
 
Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner 
and the learned Law Officer, we find that the Rules, 1980 as 
well as the Rules, 2015 were repealed by the Act and Rules of 
2018, which specifically provided that the Rules of 1980 and 
2015 stood repealed except to the extent as were not in 
consistent or in conflict with the Act and Rules of 2018. It is 
also an admitted fact that the Rules of 2015 did not provide for 
out of turn allotment to the spouse of a retired civil servant. 
Further, the Act and Rules of 2018 do not provide an 
automatic benefit to the spouse or children of a deceased or 
retired civil servant to retain the government accommodation 
on retirement/demise of the original allottee. However, their 
rights have been safeguarded by providing a special quota in 
the available government housing which is based on seniority 
of applications. A list of eligible children and spouses of 
CIVIL APPEAL NO.1459 OF 2018.  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
retired/deceased employees is accordingly maintained by the 
concerned department. That being the case, the petitioner 
would be entitled to allotment of an official accommodation at 
her own turn and she cannot rely upon the Rules of 1980 and 
or of 2015 in order to advance her claim. Further, she has 
already retained the government accommodation for a grace 
period of six months whereafter she and her husband are 
obliged to vacate the government accommodation and utilise 
house rent allowance which is paid by the government.  
6. 
 
The learned Law Officer has also pointed out that 
the petitioner’s name appears at Sr.No.13 of the waiting list 
maintained by the Respondents for allotment of government 
accommodation. We are therefore not persuaded by the 
argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that she has 
a legitimate right to retain the government accommodation 
originally allotted to her husband on the basis of 1980 Rules 
because the same have been repealed. Her case is governed by 
the Act, 2018 and the Rules framed thereunder and no legally 
enforceable vested right exists in her favour. The judgment of 
the High Court is well reasoned and does not suffer from any 
legal, procedural or jurisdictional defect, error or flaw that may 
require interference by this Court.  
7. 
 
Above are the reasons for our short order dated 
07.03.2019. The same for ease of reference is reproduced 
below:- 
CIVIL APPEAL NO.1459 OF 2018.  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
“Having heard the learned ASC for the appellant as well as 
the 
learned 
Additional 
Advocate 
General, 
Khyber 
Pakhtunkhwa and for reasons to be recorded later, this 
appeal is dismissed.”   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
JUDGE 
 
ISLAMABAD. 
07.03.2019. 
ZR/* 
‘Not Approved For Reporting’