h1

P L D 1995 LAHORE 56

WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND OTHERS
V/S
MIAN MUHAMAD RIAZ AND ANOTHER
Per Khalil-ur-Rehman Khan, J.(a) Constitution of Pakistan(1973), Article 143
r/w Electricity Act (IX of 1910)—-S.24(2) [as amended by Electricity Act (Punjab Amendment) Ordinance (XXIX of 1971) and Electricity (Amendment) Ordinance (LXII of 1979]—-
Thus, by virtue of Article 143, Central Law is to prevail where law of the Provincial Legislature in respect of matter enumerated in Concurrent List is repugnant to it. Article 143 is attracted only if the Provincial law is repugnant to the law of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) which means that the two cannot stand together.[p. 67]A

See also Kashif Nadeem alias Pappi v. The State (1992 PCr. LJ 1799). Applying the criteria and test a repugnancy noted above it is apparent that the provisions of subsection (2) of section 24 as contained in the Central Law manifestly supersede the provisions on the same subject contained in subsection (2) as enforced by the Provincial Law. Both these provisions cannot stand together as the one conferred right of appeal whereas the other took away the said right. Both provisions cannot stand together as the one conferred right of appeal whereas the other took away the said right. Both the provisions as occupy the same field the provision of the Central Law have to prevail by virtue of Article 143 of the Constitution.[p. 68]B

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: