LAHORE: Punjab Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz Sharif expressed strong concern on Tuesday on the suspension of the Punjab Protection of Ownership of Immovable Property Act, 2025 by the Lahore High Court (LHC), arguing that the move would “benefit encroachment and land-grabbing mafias”.
Maryam‘s statement issued by the CM’s Office comes a day after LHC Chief Justice Aalia Neelum issued an interim order suspending the operation of the newly enacted Punjab Protection of Ownership of Immovable Property Act, 2025, which empowers dispute resolution committees led by deputy commissioners to resolve property disputes.
The ordinance was approved by the Punjab chief minister on Oct 31 and mandates the resolution of land disputes within 90 days.
The law has been challenged in the LHC, about which Maryam argued that its enactment was aimed at providing “long-awaited relief to millions of citizens suffering from prolonged land and property disputes”.
“The legislation, for the first time, fixed a 90-day time frame for the resolution of land and property cases that have historically dragged on for years and even generations,” she said, terming the law a “major step” toward protecting ordinary citizens from powerful land grabbers and mafias.
Maryam emphasised that the “democratically elected Punjab Assembly had passed the law to free the public from the grip of influential land mafias”.
The legislation, she insisted, empowered citizens to safeguard their legally owned land and properties.
The legislation was “evidence-based and comprehensive”, covering both administrative and legal dimensions to ensure justice for the oppressed, the CM said.
Maryam further maintained that the LHC‘s decision to suspend the ordinance’s operation “is not in line with the settled principles laid down by the superior judiciary”.
Its suspension would “benefit encroachment and land-grabbing mafias”, and the public would perceive it as state patronage of such elements, she said.
The CM highlighted that progress in cases pertaining to land and property would often be stalled by stay orders for decades, and justice was being denied to rightful owners.
“This law was neither made for my personal benefit nor does its suspension harm me personally,” she said, adding that “real loss” from its suspension would be borne by the poor, widows, the helpless, and other marginalised citizens who were finally beginning to receive relief.
Maryam stressed that “legislation is the constitutional right of the provincial assembly and cannot be obstructed”.
Halting the new property law would “shatter the fragile hope of justice that had been rekindled among the poor and oppressed segments of society”, the CM said.
Ministers defend the law
Punjab Law Minister Malik Sohaib Ahmad Bherth, Information Minister Azma Bukhari, and treasury MPAs strongly defended the Punjab Protection of Ownership of Immovable Property Act, 2025, in the provincial assembly as debate over the suspension of the law intensified in the House.
Bherth maintained that the objective of the law was to make people’s lives easier, as land grabbing remained one of the biggest public grievances.
He credited CM Maryam for initiating reforms, saying that whenever she decided to curb crime, results started to appear.
The law minister claimed that officials received a large number of applications after the passage of the law, and the government started taking action on public grievances.
“So far, the government has retrieved around 5,000 properties from illegal occupants,” he said.
He noted that certain mafias opposed the law and took the matter to the high court.
“When a system is moving towards improvement, it should be allowed to function, and its weaknesses should be corrected rather than derailing it,” he said, stressing that institutions must work together.
Speaking on the matter, Information Minister Azma Bukhari said the law was designed to safeguard legal property owners, as it stood firm against the land-grabbing mafia that operates through an organised network with alleged links to sections of the bureaucracy.
“Under the law, a 90-day timeframe is provided to establish illegal occupation. So far, the officials have announced decisions in 5,044 cases, including rulings on illegal possession,” she said.
She added that committees formed under the law also scrutinised fake and forged property documents during proceedings.
Bukhari said residents of areas where cases have been decided are satisfied, as properties have been retrieved from land grabbers not in months or weeks, but in some instances, within hours.
She pointed out that the LHC currently has 169,000 pending cases, including around 11,000 property-related disputes.
She further stated that similar property protection laws are in force in countries such as China, Mexico, Brazil, and the United States, expressing surprise over a court decision reportedly directing the reversal of decisions already made under the law.
“No victim of the land grabbers was asked which party they voted for,” she said, adding that the chief minister’s sole objective was to stand with the poor.
Earlier, initiating the debate in the assembly, treasury MPA Amjad Ali Javed termed the suspension of the bill “regrettable,” saying it was meant to provide long-denied justice to citizens suffering due to land and property disputes.
He pointed out that overseas Pakistanis’ lands remained under illegal occupation for years due to prolonged stay orders.
“Millions of cases are pending in courts, and citizens spend years seeking justice. Suspension of the law adds to their suffering,” he said, urging the high courts to issue remarks with caution and allow institutions to perform their constitutional roles.
Opposition lawmaker Brigadier (retd) Mushtaq questioned “the government’s hostility toward the judiciary” and alleged that the government sought a weak judiciary while empowering district administrations and the police.
“Despite past grievances, the PTI stands with the judiciary and opposes concentrating all powers in the hands of deputy commissioners,” he added.
While Maryam has defended the law, LHC CJ Neelum expressed her disapproval of the law during the hearing on Monday, saying: “It appears that some people want to hold all powers”.
The judge had further observed that the new law had dismantled the civil setup, civil rights, and judicial supremacy.
“If it were up to the authorities, they would even suspend the Constitution,” she had said.
Questioning the purpose of the law, CJ Neelum had asked how a revenue officer could hand over the possession of a property in a matter pending before a civil court.
About the Author
