Summary: Summary Pending

Summary: Summary Pending

Summary: Art 199 constitution of Pakistan 1973. Levies force service Rules.Enactment of rules or amendment therein is prerogative of the Government.

Summary: under section 24 of the wifaqi muhtasib (ombudsman) order, 1983 the wifaqi mohtasib has the full power for creation of posts or its abolition, the sanction of establishment division for such creation in not the requirement of law.

Summary: The Single Judge's judgments allowed the rectification of the company's member registers and the reversion of 200 shares owned by Shafique Ahmad at the time of his death to his name, subject to the Articles of Association of the companies.The main issues discussed in this judgment are:Whether the Single Bench exercised its original jurisdiction under Section 152 of the Companies Ordinance 1984.Whether the Appeals filed by the Appellants are time-barred under Section 152(4) of the Ordinance read with Article 151 of the Limitation Act.The Appellants argued that the Single Judge's judgments were flawed and did not consider relevant sections of the Ordinance or the evidence available on record. They also filed applications for condonation of delay, citing reasons such as not being informed about the case's progress and receiving incorrect advice from their counsel.The Respondents argued that the appeals were time-barred, as the judgments were passed in the High Court's original jurisdiction. They contended that the grounds for condonation of delay presented by the Appellants were insufficient.The judgment clarified that the Lahore High Court's jurisdiction under the Companies Ordinance 1984 is exercised in its original jurisdiction when dealing with matters under Section 152. Therefore, appeals from such orders must be filed within 20 days, as per Article 151 of the Limitation Act.The court further stated that the grounds provided by the Appellants for condonation of delay were not sufficient to justify the delay in filing the appeals. Consequently, the applications for condonation of delay were dismissed, and the appeals were also dismissed as time-barred.

Summary: Bail granted---Background:Muneer Ahmad Sheikh and Haqeez Ullah Abbasi filed separate petitions against the order of the High Court of Sindh, Karachi.Muneer Ahmad Sheikh was granted post-arrest bail, while Haqeez Ullah Abbasi's pre-arrest bail was denied.Both petitioners argued that they were not involved in nepotism or favoritism and had been exonerated in the inquiries related to the appointments of their relatives.The Special Prosecutors argued that both petitioners had manipulated the appointment process to benefit their family members and thus did not deserve bail.---Issues:Whether the petitioners were involved in nepotism or favoritism in the appointment of their relatives.Whether the denial of bail was justified based on the prima facie evidence against the petitioners.---Holding/Reasoning/Outcome:The Supreme Court reviewed the record and considered arguments from both sides.Both petitioners were accused of manipulating appointments in the Sindh Technical Education Vocational Training Authority for their relatives.Although they were exonerated in departmental inquiries, they were still considered to have a prima facie role in the alleged crime.However, the Court noted that many others involved in similar activities had not been arrested or questioned, suggesting a lack of consistent application of accountability measures.The Court expressed reluctance to deny bail to the petitioners when accountability measures were not uniformly applied.The Court converted the petitions into appeals and granted bail to Muneer Ahmad Sheikh upon furnishing bail bonds and confirmed the bail of Haqeez Ullah Abbasi.---Quote:It would be unjust to keep the petitioners behind the bars when the law regulating accountability does not appear to have been applied across the board.

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.