Summary: 1.Under section 8-A of the Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005, an order that is appealable to the High Court does not include an order dismissing the complaint. However, the appeal can be converted to a criminal revision. 2.In order to constitute an offence under the Illegal Dispossession Act, the complaint must disclose actus reas and mens rea, and if the facts that constitute an offence under section 3 of the Illegal Dispossession Act are not disclosed through the complaint or documents with it, then the Court can dismiss the complaint straight away. Rel: Waqar Ali v. The State (PLD 2011 SC 181).

Summary: [Service matters (Dismissal-Termination)] the petitioner has sought indulgence of this Court while calling in question the termination letter dated 26.02.2019 issued by the Federal Urdu University of Arts, Science and Technology (hereinafter referred to as University), relieving her from the services of University with retrospective effect i.e. 20.10.2018, which according to the petitioner is without lawful authority and of no legal effect.---We are not satisfied with the assertion of the respondent-university on the aforesaid analogy, for the reason that Fundamental Rule 54, is clear in its terms, dealing with the reinstatement of the employee consequent to setting aside of his dismissal/removal from service, the entitlement of the employee, to have the period of his absence from his service treated as "on duty" is a statutory consequence of his being reinstated on the merits--This being the legal position of the case, the instant petition is allowed with no order as to costs by holding that the impugned termination order dated 26.02.2019 issued by respondent-university is without legal consequence. Thus, the service of the petitioner is reinstated with effect from termination of her service i.e. 14.02.2019. The respondents are directed to grant her service benefits for the intervening period in accordance with law, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

Summary: Post Arrest Bail Application on medical ground dismissed in view of the recommendations of the Medical Board

Summary: ----R.44(4)---Recovery of income tax---Temporary relief to taxpayer from coercive measures /recovery of disputed income tax amount---Scope--- Petitioner impugned notice under R.44(4) ofIncome Tax Rules, 2002 on the ground that same was issued without lawf

Summary: Background:Khawaja Saad Rafique and Khawaja Salman Rafique, along with others, are accused of launching a housing scheme called Paragon City through Paragon City Private Limited.The scheme allegedly commenced without approval from the Lahore Development Authority (LDA).The accused are accused of obtaining approval for the scheme based on forged documents and illegally possessing state lands for the scheme's development.Allegations include illegal occupation and conversion of land into plots, receiving funds without justification, and involvement in financial transactions through proxy companies to conceal the money trail.---Issues:Whether the accused unlawfully initiated the Paragon City housing scheme without proper approval and engaged in illegal land occupation and conversion.Whether the accused received funds through illegitimate means and engaged in financial transactions aimed at concealing the money trail.Whether the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) has been conducting investigations impartially and adhering to legal and constitutional standards.---Holding/Reasoning/Outcome:The court notes the allegations against the accused regarding the unlawful initiation and operation of the Paragon City housing scheme, illegal land occupation, and financial irregularities.Concerns are raised regarding the impartiality and professionalism of the NAB in conducting investigations and pursuing cases.The court expresses the importance of upholding constitutional and legal standards, ensuring fairness and transparency in the investigative process.It highlights the need for civil society to remain vigilant and demand freedom of thought and expression to safeguard democratic values.

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Against impugned act of inviting bid date 7.1.19 being contrary to the provisioins of PPRA Ordinance 2002