[PROVISIONAL TRANSLATION FROM PERSIAN]

 

[Translator’s notes appear in square brackets]

[Personal information has been redacted.]

 

[Emblem]

Islamic Republic of Iran

Judiciary

Court:

 

Court Order

Do not follow (your) base desires, lest you deviate

 

Date:

Number:

Enclosure:

 

[signature over stamp––Certified Copy]

 

Case Reference: 80-3505

Court Order Number:  86-243

Date of Review:  13/12/86 [3 March 2008]

 

Administrative Court:  Islamic Revolutionary Court of Justice— Special Division for the Orders of the Supreme Leader and Article 49 in the Fars Province.

 

Appellants: 1- Abd-Ali, and 2- Jan-Ali (both) Rasteh; 3- Sasan, [and] 4- Jahanshir (Javanshir) (both) Dastpish; 5- Hosnollah Davardan; 6- Mohammad-Gholi Bahamin; 7- Safiyollah Baghdad; 8- Ali-Reza Behnam Moakhkher; 9- Khalil Ramin; 10- Jahanbakhsh Behinain;

11- Ezzatollah Ravanbakhsh; 12- Raham Ariapour; 13- Soleiman Rayeneh—all represented by Messrs. 1- Seyed Hasan Alavi [Hosein in another document], and 2- Mr. Mohammad Raji, both residents of Shiraz [address]; 14- Mohammad Bahamin, son of Motedani, resident of Isfahan [address]; 15- Vajihollah Davardan, son of Jafar, resident of  Isfahan [address]; 16- Najaf Bahamin, son of Motedani, resident of Dina [address]; 17- Zabihollah Dastpish, son of Mohammad-Kazem, resident of Isfahan [address]; 18- Rahmatollah Rad, son of Azam, resident of Isfahan [address] , son of Karam, resident of Isfahan [address].

 

Respondent:  Representative of the Setad-e Ejraee-ye Farman-e Imam [Execution of Imam Khomeini’s Order][EIKO] in Fars, resident of Shiraz [address]

 

Subject of Appeal:  Court Order Number 81-24, dated 24/2/81 [14 May 2002], issued by the Islamic Revolutionary Court, Special Division for Article 49 in the Fars Province

 

Procedural Synopsis:  The appellants have submitted appeals against the respondent to the Islamic Revolutionary Court, Special Division for the order of the Supreme Leader and Article 49 in the Fars Province. The appeal was registered under the above-noted reference; and on 13/12/86 [3 March 2008], at a pre-scheduled time, the court is convened, presided over by the undersigned. With reliance on the Almighty God, and subsequent to reviewing the file records, the court concludes the hearing and issues a decision as follows. 

 

 

Decision of the Court:

 

Concerning the appeals made by Messrs. 1- Abd-Ali Rasteh, 2- Jan-Ali Rasteh, 3- Sasan Dastpish, 4- Javanshir Dastpish, 5- Hosnollah Davardan, 6- Mohammad Gholi Bahamin,

7- Safiyollah Baghdad, 8- Ali-Reza Behnam Moakhkher, 9- Khalil Ramin, 10- Jahanbakhsh Behinain, 11- Ezzat Ravanbakhsh, 12- Raham Ariapour, 13- Soleiman Rayeneh—represented by Messrs. 1- Seyed Hasan Alavi and Mr. Mohammad Raji, attorney at law; also, appeals of Messrs. 14- Rahmatollah Rad, Zabihollah Dastpish, 16 Najaf Bahamin,

17- Mohammad Bahamin, 18- Khalil Ramin, 19- Hedayatollah Rezvanifar, 20- heirs to late Hedayatollah Behinaeen—i.e., Jahangir Jahanbakhsh, Jalal, Jamshid, Akhtar, and Ghamar.

against court order number 81-24, dated 24/2/81 [14 May 2002], [issued by] the Islamic Revolutionary Court of Justice—Special Division for the order of the Supreme Leader and Article 49 in the Fars Province, [the court] reviewed and considered the file records. According to court order [number] 1658, dated 29/1/73 [18 April 1994], issued by the ecclesiastical magistrate in Branch 1 of the Islamic Revolutionary Court in Shiraz, the entire assets of the noted individuals, including their buildings and lands, were confiscated and placed in the possession of the Setad-e Ejraee-ye Farman-e Imam [Execution of Imam Khomeini’s Order][EIKO]. This decision was endorsed and finalised by Hojatoleslam Nayyeri, and was further amended by court order number 81-24, dated 24/2/81 [14 May 2002]—inasmuch as the final and binding verdict was general and pertained to all the Baha’is who had deserted the village of Kata; however, the order did not contain the names of the above-noted individuals. Therefore, an amended court order was issued to include all the names. Considering that the named individuals did not present a compelling and substantive reasoning to merit rescission of the court’s decision, and that their appeal and objection to the original final and binding court order is subject to conditions and regulations that were valid at the time of the issuance of the said order, pursuant to Article 21 of the Hearing Procedures Code related to Article 49, the right [to appeal] has not been granted to the appellants. Therefore, according to the above [explanation], in light of Article 197 of the Civil Procedures Code, the court dismisses the appeal and upholds the [original] verdict number 81-24, 24/2/81 [14 May 2002] as it stands.  This decision was issued in the presence [of the appellants] and can be appealed within 20 days of its issuance in the Court of Appeal in the Province of Tehran.

 

Baneshi

Head of the Islamic Revolutionary Court of Justice—Special Division for Article 49 in the Province of Fars

[stamp:] Certified Copy

[signature]