P L D 1990 LAHORE 488
ABDUL AZIZ QURESHI ADVOCATE
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN AND OTHERS
Per Raja Afrasiab Khan, J.(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article. 67, 69 &199—
A personal of Article 69 ibid shows that validity of any proceedings in the Parliament cannot be called in question on the ground of any irregularity of procedure while Article 67 shows that any proceeding in the House shall not be rendered invalid on the ground that some persons, who were not entitled to do so sat, voted or otherwise took in the proceedings. The proceedings of the House are being challenged before us on the premises of the participation of respondents Nos. 4 to 110, who allegedly were not competent to sit in the House. Apart form the position that the allegations are not well founded the proceedings would not be open to question legally in view of the cumulative effect of Articles 67 and 69 of the constitution. We are fortified in our view by the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lt.-Col. Farzand Ali as well as full Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of A.M. Khan Laghari v. Government of Pakistan (P L D 1967 Lahore 227) and Lt.- Col. Farzand Ali v. Province of West Pakistan 1980 S C M R 909. The relevant portion of the judgment in case of Lt.- Col. Farzand Ali and others. [p.492] A, B & C.
This brings us to the third proposition as to whether it is a fit case for issuance of writ of quo warranto. Suffice it is to observe that Assembly having been dissolved over two years back, it is not a for case for issuance of a writ of quo warranto and not a case covered by Article 199(1)(b)(ii). The following passage of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lt.-Col. Farzand Ali may be reproduced hereunder as the same squarely answers this proposition as well: — [p.497] D