h1

P L D 1990 LAHORE 401

WASI ZAFAR

V/S

SPEAKER PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLY


Per Khalil-ur-Rahman Khan, J.

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Articles 199, & 109:

Article 199 — Proceedings in Constitutional petition — Adjournment — Advocate-General remained present on the last date of hearing — Advocate-General seeking adjournment through a private legal practitioner instead of deputing any one out of the Additional Advocate-General and the team of the Assistant Advocates-General, the Law officrs appointed by the Provincial Government — Request for adjournment was oppossed by the petitioner saying that adjournment was being sought to frustrate the petition as well as the prayer for interim relief and if the request for adjournment was allowed petition would be rendered infructuous — High Court, in view of such unprecedented conduct of Advocate-General and other Law Officers and the fact that no justification was made out for adjourning the petition, decided to proceed with the same and not to adjourn it and allowed the petitioner to continue with his arguments — [Advocate-General — Adjournment] (p. 405) A

Article 109 — Rules of Procedure of the Provincial Assembly of the Punjab, 1973, Rules 3 & 4 — Order of Governor chaning the time after having summoned the meeting of the Provincial Assembly was in no manner violative of the provisions of Article 109 of the Constitution or Rules 3 and 4 of the Rules of Procedure of the Provincial Assembly of the Punjab, 1973. [p.406]B

Article 199 — Constitutional jurisdiction — Procedure adopted for conducting the proceeding of the Assembly cannot be scrutinized by the High Court in exercise of its Constitutional jurisdiction. [p. 408] D

Article 199 — Constitutional jurisdiction — High Court’s Constitutional jurisdiction is invocable to correct any error of law or transgression of jurisdiction by any person or authority in the circumstances where interpretation of the provisions of the Constitution is invaolved and the question for determination relates to the constitution of the Legislature so long as the order to be passed is not repugnant to any other provisions of the Constitution. [p. 409] E

A.K. FAZALUL QUADER CHAUDRY V. SHAH NAWAZ AND OTHERS PLD 1966 SC 105; MIRZA TAHIR BEG V. KAUSAR ALI PLD 1976 SC 504; AHMAD SAEED KIRMAN’S CASE PLD 1958 SC 397; FARZAND ALI V. PROVINCE OF WEST PAKISTAN PLD 1970 SC 98. Ref.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: