h1

P L D 1994 SC 738

PIR SABIR SHAH

V/S

FEDERATION OF PAKSITAN AND OTHERS


CONSTITUTION OF PAKSITAN (1973), ARTICLES 264, 58 & 112:

Article 264 — Political Parties Act (III of 1962), Section 8B [as amended by Political Parties (Amendment) Ordinance (XXX of 1993)] — Political Parties (Amendment) Ordinance, 1993 being a temporary piece of legislation, proceedings initiated by the Parliamentary Party against Members of Provincial Assembly on 5.2.1994 could not have been saved by virtue of Article 264, Constitution of Pakistan on the lapse of Political Parties
(Amendment) Ordinance, 1993 on 6.2.1994. [p. 781]H

GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB THROUGH SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT V. ZIA ULLAH KHAN & 2 OTHERS 1992 SCMR 602; MUHAMMAD NAEEM ALIAS NAEEMA V. THE STATE 1992 SCMR 1617. Ref.

Article 112 of the Constitution relates to the power of the Governor to dissolve the Assembly. Under Clause (1) thereof, the Governor is bound to dissolve the Assembly if so advised by the Chief Minister except that the advice of the Chief Minister, against whom notice of a resolution of no-confidence has been
given, is not binding in view of the Explanation to clause (1) of the Article. Whereas, under clause (2) of Article 112, it has been provided that the Governor may also dissolve the Provincial Assembly in his discretion but subject to the previous approval of the President. [p. 787] P

The language employed in clause (1) of Article 234 is not identical to that used in Articles 58(2)(b) and 112(2)(b) of the Constitution inasmuch the words “and an appeal to the electorate is necessary” have been omitted in the former meaning thereby that an action under the said provision is of a temporary nature, which does not necessitate an appeal to the electorate. So the expression “a situation has arisen in which the Government of the Province cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution” will have different connotation while construing clause (1) of Article 234 than what it means in Article 58(2)(b) or Article 112(2)(b) of the Constitution. In the former case, it is a temporary breakdown of the Constitutional machinery not necessitating an appeal to the electorate, but in the latter case the breakdown of the Constitutional machinery is total necessitating an appeal to the electorate for a new mandate. [p. 792]I

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: