Summary: The Government of Sindh is directed to expedite the process by ensuring reconstituting of Search Committee within two months from the receipt of this order and shall also complete the process of interview of all the candidates afresh for the appointment for the post of Vice-Chancellor, University of Karachi, at the earliest. Meanwhile, the Search Committee (after reconstitution) shall send the copies of the original academic certificates/degrees/publications of the petitioners and the private respondents to the Higher Education Commission of Pakistan for verification. The Higher Education Commission of Pakistan is directed to look into the academic qualification certificates/publications of the petitioners and the private respondents and after ascertaining genuineness or otherwise submit the report to the Search Committee constituted by the Government of Sindh in a sealed envelope within one month for further proceedings.

Summary: Assistant Director, Directorate of Intelligence & Investigation, Islamabad has no jurisdiction to issue any notice to a tax payer, who is not registered either with LTU or RTO Islamabad in terms of SRO 350(I)/2014 dated 7.5.2014.

Summary: [Ehtram-e-Ramazan Ordinance, 1981 (Section 5)] Since in all the petition, the places mentioned does not fall within exemption given under section 5 of the Ordinance, therefore, all the petitions are dismissed.

Summary: [Banking Law, Criminal Procedure Code, General Clauses Act, 1897 (Section 24A)] petitioner is precluded from raising such contentionin the generalized form, more importantly as we have already observed itis not the kind of investigation that would be governed by any of theabove enactment since it involves a question of granting auto loan onthe basis of bogus document such as Auto loan agreement, ID Card ofindividuals who never applied for such loan. It is mainly related to theirofficers concerned and it is to be seen whether any public exchequer,cess was involved and/or misappropriated including but not limited tothe offence that has already been registered.

Summary: In our view, no candidate shall be appointed to a post unless after such medical examination as Government may prescribe such candidate is found medically fit to discharge the duties of the post. In the present case, the petitioner was relieved from the duties on medical grounds and his appeal was rejected on the same analogy. Besides above, the assertion of the petitioner is misconceived on the premise that he obtained a medical examination fitness test certificate on 02.12.2019 after the rejection of his appeal, on 14.5.2019, thus this document could not be taken into consideration, besides the respondents have relied upon the documents which prima facie show adverse inference against him. Thus, at this stage, we cannot declare him medically fit or otherwise for the subject post, which was a contractual position and by efflux of time expired.

Summary: The appellant argues that the Banking Court dismissed their application to challenge the sale proceedings without proper consideration. They claim that they were not informed of the proceedings as they are a permanent resident of the USA. The appellant also asserts that the property was undervalued for auction, and that the sale was not conducted fairly. Respondent No.1 argues that the appellant's leave to defend application was considered and dismissed by the Banking Court. They state that the judgment and decree were passed against the appellant, and no appeal was filed within the prescribed time. The auction proceedings were completed, and the property was sold to an auction purchaser who took possession. Respondent No.5, representing the auction purchaser, asserts that the auction proceedings were properly conducted and the full amount was deposited by the purchaser. They argue that the appellant's claims about property valuation are unsupported and that the auction should stand. The court concluded that the appellant's claims are without merit. They state that the appellant's lack of knowledge about the proceedings is not supported by the record, and that the auction purchaser's rights are protected once the sale is confirmed. The court dismissed the appeal and upholds the impugned order.

Summary: Two consolidated petitions challenging the tendering process and subsequent award of a contract by the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) for the monitoring of bonded cargo transportation in Pakistan to NLC Construction Solution Private Limited (NCSPL). The petitions, filed by Assetlink Asia (Private) Limited and E-Movers (Private) Limited, alleged misprocurement in the award process, citing violations of public procurement laws.The court examined the tendering process, the criteria for bid evaluation, and the subsequent alterations made to these criteria, which favored NCSPL, a company not initially shortlisted and with questionable eligibility due to its late entry into the tender process and lack of requisite licensing at the time of bid submission. The court found the modifications to the evaluation criteria, made post bid opening and upon NCSPL's request, to be non-transparent and unjustified, resulting in NCSPL, the least qualified bidder, being awarded the contract.The judgment referenced several precedents, including "Muhammad Ayub & Brothers vs. Capital Development Authority Islamabad" and "Toyota Garden Motors (Private) Limited vs. Government of Punjab & Others," to underscore the principles of transparency, fairness, and legality in the public procurement process. It emphasized that any changes to the tender terms post bid opening, especially to the advantage of an otherwise unsuccessful bidder, are impermissible.The court concluded that the tendering process culminating in the award to NCSPL was in violation of public procurement laws, resulting in misprocurement. Consequently, the contract awarded to NCSPL was set aside, and the FBR was directed to initiate a new, law-compliant tendering process. The petition filed by Assetlink Asia was dismissed, while the petition by E-Movers, framed as public interest litigation, was allowed, leading to the annulment of the contract awarded to NCSPL.

Summary: #NAME?

Summary: The High Court of Sindh at Karachi adjudicated on multiple civil suits filed by various industrial plaintiffs against the Federation of Pakistan and others. The suits challenged the lawfulness of the defendants' decision to disrupt the natural gas supply on Sundays and holidays, asserting that such disruptions were unlawful and sought injunctions to prevent these disruptions.The plaintiffs were industrial entities reliant on natural gas for their operations, including electricity generation for self-use. They argued that the disruptions caused significant production losses and cited a previous court decree that deemed similar disruptions illegal. However, the defendants, including the Sui Southern Gas Company Ltd., contended that the gas supply interruptions were necessitated by higher off-takes leading to decreased availability, line pack depletion, and low system pressure.The court, presided over by Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, considered the constitutional provisions, particularly Articles 158 and 172, which prioritize the gas-producing province's needs and outline the joint ownership of mineral resources between the province and the federal government. The court also reviewed the Natural Gas Allocation and Management Policy, which sets the priority for gas supply, placing domestic and commercial sectors at the top.The defense argued that the gas supply decisions were made in the broader public interest, considering the demand-supply gap and aiming to ensure uninterrupted supply to domestic consumers. The court acknowledged the necessity of managing the gas supply due to limited resources and the need to prioritize domestic consumption.Ultimately, the court found that the Sunday closure notices were not issued in violation of constitutional rights but were a response to unavoidable circumstances. It dismissed the injunction applications but directed the Sui Southern Gas Company Ltd. to make efforts to stabilize the gas supply system and report compliance. The court emphasized that the Sunday closures could not be a permanent or indefinite measure.

Summary: Quashing / bail, in fiscal offences, in writ jurisdiction