Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Sugar Scam/ Against the impugned notification dated 16.03.2020 issued by M/o Interior and also seeks direction to set aside the impugned report of commission of inquiry consuited by M/o Interior to probe into the increase in sugar prices dated 21.05.2020

Summary: (a) Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the National Assembly, 2007- -R. 203-Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 69 & 199-Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)-Public Accounts Committee of the National Assembly, functions of-Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court-Scope-Public Accounts Committee of National Assembly was a recommendary committee which was required to examine accounts of relevant year and to make recommendations-Report of Public Accounts Committee was to be presented along with recommendations to National Assembly for decisions-Per Art. 69 of the Constitution, there existed a bar on questioning and inquiring into proceedings of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) which included any decision/proceeding(s) of Public Accounts Committee of National Assembly-Proceedings of Public Accounts Committee being internal proceedings were immune from being inquired into by High Court under Art. 199 of Constitution. Muhammad Azhar Siddiqui and others v. Federation of Pakistan and others PLD 2012 SC 774; Nawab Khan Khattak v. Public Accounts Committee and others 2002 YLR 2209 and BNP (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Capital Development Authority and others 2016 CLC 1169 rel. (b) Constitution of Pakistan- -Arts. 69 & 199-Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)-Public Accounts Committee of the National Assembly, functions of-Statutory audit of Public Authorities-Nature of audit of public authority-Audit objection, effect of-Construction contracts-National Highway Authority ("NHA")-Scope-Petitioner which held a construction contract with National Highway Authority, impugned demand made by NHA for recovery of certain amounts paid to petitioner, allegedly on instructions of Public Accounts Committee of National Assembly-Validity-As per record, audit report of National Highway Authority was placed on agenda of Public Accounts Committee however, paragraph which stated an audit objection on payment made to petitioner was not discussed and no instructions/recommendations on same were given by Public Accounts Committee-National Highway Authority was using an audit objection as basis for recovering of amount from petitioner, which was not valid as audit objection was merely an observation which required probe and by itself was merely information to be placed before an authority-Audit objection therefore could not form basis for recovery of amount from petitioner and NHA could not ignore terms of the construction contract-High Court held that NHA could not seek to recover the amount from petitioner as there existed no instructions by Public Accounts Committee in this regard, and even otherwise Public Accounts Committee was a recommendary committee and as such could not issue directions to NHA to initiate any recovery-Constitutional petition was allowed, accordingly. Ms. Ambreen Moeen, D.A.G. along with Shaukat Ali, Audit Officer in the office of Respondent No.4.

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: The petitioner, Riaz Hussain, a Band Master in BS-7, challenged a show cause notice issued to him under the Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act, 2006. The petitioner claimed that the notice was mala fide, while the Assistant Advocate General argued that challenging a show cause notice at this stage is premature. The court emphasized that a show cause notice is not an adverse order and is not subject to judicial review unless it is mala fide, without jurisdiction, or coram non judice. The court outlined the legal principles related to mala fides, emphasizing that specific evidence is required to prove mala fides, and a mere allegation is insufficient. The court concluded that the petitioner had only alleged mala fide without providing other grounds and directed the petitioner to pursue remedies through departmental channels.