Summary: Sections of Law; Article 199 of the Constitution and NADRA Ordinance 2000(a) Amenability of NADRA to constitutional jurisdiction of High Court is a different question from maintainability of a writ petition of an employee of NADRA in absence of Statutory rules.(b) A writ petition filed against any irregularities conducted during the process of recruitment, by NADRA authorities would be maintainable before High Court.

Summary: In pursuance of power conferred upon the Authority under the supra section, the Authority has approved the Regulations, called, National Database and Registration Authority Employees (Service) Regulations, 2002 to govern the terms and conditions of the service of employees of the NADRA. There is no denial of the fact that section 45 of the Ordinance, 2000, empowered the Authority to make regulations. It is also pertinent to mention that the dominant control and management under the Ordinance, 2000, vests in the Federal Government. Overall superintendence and directions of the affairs and the business of the Authority have been entrusted and vested in the Authority. The Chairman or Registrar General is also to be appointed by the Federal Government. The perusal of Sections 3, 5, 26, 33, 38, 44, 45 and 47 leads to an irresistible conclusion that not only the NADRA is creation of the Statute but effective and substantial role of the Federal Government in its affairs is also directly involved.Under Section 45 of the Ordinance, 2000, there is no requirement of the legislature that the regulations framed by the Authority are subject to the approval of government. The NADRA Employees (Service) Regulations, 2002 backed by the NADRA Ordinance, 2000, are thus, held to be statutoryAlthough the NADRA is a statutory body but if at all we presume it not statutory even then, the case of the petitioner is based upon discrimination as other similarly placed employees, mentioned above, have been regularized by the department, which is, otherwise, violation of rights conferred under Article 25 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.

Summary: Damages suit against NADRA and 9 other.Fraud vitiates most solemn proceedings.

Summary: (a) Juvenile Justice System Act (XXII of 2018)-------S. 8--- Age, determination of--- Contradictory documents---Constitution of MedicalBoard---Scope---Accused assailed the dismissal of his application whereby he had soughtdetermination of his age through Medical Board---Birth certificate of accused showed his ageto be less than 18 years whereas the record of NADRA showed his age more than 18 years---Court was required to hold an inquiry into the matter whenever a question arose with regardto age of accused---Petition was accepted and the case was remanded to the Trial Court withdirection to conduct the inquiry for determination of the age of accused in view of S. 8 of theJuvenile Justice System Act, 2018.(b) Juvenile Justice System Act (XXII of 2018)-------S. 8---Determination of age---Scope---When controversy regarding the age of an accusedcannot be settled through documentary evidence and the medical opinion due to difference inopinion then preference is always to be given to the medical opinion.2012 SCMR 1400 ref.(c) Juvenile Justice System Act (XXII of 2018)-------S. 8---Determination of age---Scope---Section 8 of the Juvenile Justice System Act, 2018provides that the court should hold an inquiry when it is confronted with a question about theage of an accused person---Purpose of an inquiry is to find out the truth, therefore, it was tobe spreaded over a fairly broad spectrum---Court was to not only take into consideration thedocuments produced by the parties, but where necessary, it should also record statements ofthe witnesses---Court was to also requisition medical report, which means clinical andradiological examination of the accused or what is called his ossification test---Plain readingof S. 8 of Juvenile Justice System Act, 2018, shows that determination of age is mandatoryunless there are strong reasons to dispense with the same.

Summary: Contract employees in question are governed by the National Database and Registration Authority Employees (Service) Regulations, 2002 which are non-statutory in nature and therefore they cannot be granted relief in constitutional jurisdiction.-----NADRA introduced a scheme in 2012 that provided two options for these employees. One option was to continue as contractual employees with revised terms, and the other was to be "regularized" as permanent employees. The appellants chose Option I, which maintained their contractual status with revised terms.The main issue in the case revolved around the termination clause in the contract. The termination clause in the original contracts allowed for termination on thirty days' notice, but after the exercise of Option I, the termination clause was changed to require three months' notice.The appellants were terminated from their positions, and they challenged the termination in the High Court through constitutional petitions. The High Court dismissed their petitions, stating that the National Database and Registration Authority Employees (Service) Regulations, 2002 were non-statutory and thus the court couldn't intervene in matters related to service terms and conditions.The appellants appealed this decision to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court considered whether the termination clauses were reasonable and valid. It analyzed similar cases involving termination from service by statutory bodies and examined whether the termination clauses violated principles of natural justice. The court also distinguished between the regular employees and contractual employees and the implications of their chosen options.Ultimately, the Supreme Court concluded that the termination clauses in the contracts were valid and upheld the High Court's decision to dismiss the constitutional petitions filed by the appellants.

Summary: Finger prints and photographs of the petitioner were not matched from NADRA record, therefore, the case of the petitioner is one of further inquiring entitling him to be released on bail.

Summary: Regulation No. 13 of the National Database and Registration Authority (Application for National Identity Card) Regulation, 2002 is replaced, in favour of disabled person; having no finger for impression on CNIC --- The petitioner, a certified disabled individual with amputated hands, claimed that his Computerized National Identity Card (CNIC) was issued without the necessary foot toe impression. This omission prevented him from accessing certain benefits, such as obtaining a mobile SIM card or opening a bank account, in violation of Regulation No. 13 of the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) Regulations of 2002.Regulation No. 13 specified that individuals with amputated hands should provide the impression of their left or right foot toe on the application form. The court ordered NADRA to amend its software to issue revised CNICs with foot toe impressions within six weeks.However, the petitioner returned to the court, claiming that the order had not been fully implemented. While CNICs with foot toe impressions were issued, they were not recognized or verified by the NADRA's software. Mr. Mohsin Matloob, Deputy Director (Operations) at NADRA, could not provide a satisfactory response, so the Chairman of NADRA was directed to investigate and submit a report.A notification dated July 21, 2017, was presented in court, which indicated an amendment to Regulation 13. Under the revised regulation, eunuchs were given the choice to select their gender as "Male Eunuch," "Female Eunuch," or "Unisex." Additionally, the regulation provided options for individuals with amputated hands based on their specific conditions.The court was informed that the amended Regulation 13 had rationalized the process. As a result, the court discharged the contempt notice, provided assurances from NADRA that individuals with disabilities would not face any further hindrances, and declared the case as "Disposed of accordingly."

Summary: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------Ss. 420, 468, 471 & 109---National Database and Registration Authority Ordinance (VIIIof 2000), S. 30(i)(ii)---Foreigners Act (XXXI of 1946), S. 14---Prevention of Corruption Act(II of 1947), S. 5(2)---Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property, forgery forpurpose of cheating, using as genuine a forged document, abetment, concealing and refusingto furnish information which a person ought to disclose or furnish etc, contravention ofprovisions of law or any order made thereunder and corruption, public servant committed orattempt to commit criminal misconduct---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Prosecution case was that accused being an active agent for preparing and managing passportfor travelling to foreign countries for the employment, through infrequent routes, afterobtaining money through fraud---Record showed that 8-smart Computerized NationalIdentity Cards and one colour photocopy of a Computerized National Identity Card alongwith 4-birth certificates were recovered from the possession of accused---Prosecution hadnominated said persons as accused in whose name the recovered Computerized NationalIdentity Cards were issued---Prosecution despite efforts had failed to trace out the saidpersons from given addresses---Prosecution however, succeeded to trace out accused inwhose name the said recovered Computerized National Identity Card was issued---During thecourse of investigation, the accused in whose name, Computerized National Identity Cardwas issued, had recorded his confessional statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. before theJudicial Magistrate---Said accused confessed that in-fact he was resident of Afghanistan, hearrived in the country without any travelling documents and received Computerized NationalIdentity Card and passport of the country after the payment of Rs. 15,00,000---Said accusedwas trying to travel abroad and was arrested---Accused in his confessional statement hadnominated no other person as co-accused---Findings of the Examiner showed that no expertopinion was drawn to ascertain the genuineness of documents, such documents were nothelpful for the prosecution---Circumstances established that prosecution had failed to proveits case beyond shadow of any doubt, benefit of which would resolve in favour of coaccused---Co-accused persons, in circumstances, were acquitted by setting aside convictionand sentence recorded by Trial Court against them; however, the case of accused, afterrecording his confessional statement under S. 164, Cr.P.C. and further recovery ofComputerized National Identity Card and Passport of the country, had been proved, whobeing the national of Afghanistan had managed to prepare Computerized National IdentityCard and Passport and used the same as citizen of the Pakistan---Appeal of accused againstconvictions and sentences was dismissed.

Summary: Art. 199 Constitution of Pakistan, 1973.S. 18(3) NADRA Ordinance, 2000.inbuilt provision for appellate forum.

Summary: ''Election Tribunal has given no reason to reject the report of NADRA. It is clear and unmistakable that 2,147 used counterfoils had invalid NIC numbers. Since the votes to be excluded are greater in number than the winning margin, this would materially affect the result of the election, thereby bringing the case within the purview of Section 70 of the Representation of People Act, 1976, warranting declaration of the election to be void as a whole.'' --- Background:This appeal, brought under Section 67(3) of the Representation of People Act, 1976, challenges the judgment of the Election Tribunal in Sukkur, which dismissed the appellant's election petition. The appellant and respondent No. 1 contested the general elections for PS-23, Naushahro Feroze-V, Sindh, with the respondent declared the winner. The appellant alleged widespread irregularities, including bogus voting and manipulation by the respondent, in collusion with election officials.Issues Presented:The maintainability of the petition concerning its verification in accordance with the law.The occurrence of illegal and corrupt practices during the election process by the respondent.Violations of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1976 by the election staff.The impact of these issues on the integrity and outcome of the election.Judgment:The Supreme Court found that the election petition and its annexures were duly verified, contrary to the Election Tribunal's finding. The Court held that the appellant's allegations were not vague and were sufficiently detailed to warrant consideration. Despite the appellant's failure to prove corrupt and illegal practices through direct evidence, the Court found significant merit in the NADRA report, which invalidated a considerable number of votes due to non-compliance with mandatory identification procedures.The NADRA report revealed that 2,417 used counterfoils were invalid, and 61 used counterfoils lacked fingerprints or thumb impressions, leading to a total of 2,478 questionable votes. This number exceeded the vote margin between the appellant and the respondent, thereby materially affecting the election's outcome.Conclusion:The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment of the Election Tribunal, and declared the election of PS-23, Naushahro Feroze-V, void. The Court ordered the Election Commission of Pakistan to conduct fresh elections for the said constituency in accordance with the law. No order as to costs was made.