Loading... Account
Dark Mode
Step 1 of 8

Welcome!

Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.
Step 1 of 7

Welcome!

Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.

Latest Judgments (All Jurisdictions within Pakistan)

Mst AYSHA ASIF vs GOVERNOR STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN and others

Citation: 2020 CLD 1431

Case No: Writ Petition No. 6903/2020

Judgment Date: 16/01/2021

Jurisdiction: Lahore High Court

Judge: Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, J

Summary: Summary pending

JAMEEL SWEETS vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others

Citation: 2020 PTD 752

Case No: Writ Petition No.75/2020

Judgment Date: 16/01/2021

Jurisdiction: Lahore High Court

Judge: Shamas Mehmood Mirza, J

Summary: Summary pending

Syed SHAKEEL AHMED vs RAJ KUMAR

Citation: 2023 CLC 1273

Case No: R.F.A. No.19/2020

Judgment Date: 15/01/2021

Jurisdiction: Balochistan High Court

Judge: Zaheer-ud-Din Kakar and Sardar Ahmed Haleemi, JJ

Summary: Summary pending

ZAIN SHAHID vs The STATE

Citation: 2022 PCrLJ 1476

Case No: Special Criminal A.T. Appeal No. 100/2020

Judgment Date: 15/01/2021

Jurisdiction: Sindh High Court

Judge: Mohammed Karim Khan Agha and Khadim Hussain Tunio, JJ

Summary: Summary pending

The State thr. Director General FIA, FIA Headquarters, Islamabad v. Alif Rehman

Citation: 2021 SCP 68, 2021 SCMR 503

Case No: Crl.P.994/2020

Judgment Date: 15/01/2021

Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of Pakistan

Judge: Mr. Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi

Summary: A raid was conducted, and the respondent was found in possession of foreign currency from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. A case was registered against the respondent under the Foreign Exchange Regulations Act, 1947. The petitioner claims that the High Court did not consider the fact that exchanging currency without approval is prohibited under the Act. The court notes that the respondent did not seek permission or produce any documents related to the foreign currency exchange, which is required by law. The court also highlights the importance of regulating foreign currency exchange for the economic and financial interests of the state. The court mentions that an amendment to the Act has increased the punishment for contravening its provisions. Considering the gravity of the matter and the national interest involved, the court determines that the High Court's order is not sustainable. The court also notes that the issue of returning the Pakistani currency was not challenged before them. However, under Article 187 of the Constitution of Pakistan, the court has the power to issue any order or direction necessary for doing complete justice. Therefore, the court sets aside the High Court's order and retains the authority to pass appropriate orders in the interest of justice.

Province of Punjab through Secretary Communication & Works Department, Lahore through Chief Engineer (Noth/Central), Punjab Highway Department, 2-Lake Road, Lahore v. Yasir Majeed, etc

Citation: 2021 SCP 67, 2021 SCMR 624

Case No: C.P.1134-L/2018

Judgment Date: 15/01/2021

Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of Pakistan

Judge: Mr. Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi

Summary: The dispute revolves around the respondent No. 1's petrol pump, which was initially granted access from the main Lahore-Kasur Road in 2004. However, the Punjab Highway Department later denied this access. Consequently, the respondent filed a Constitutional Petition before the Lahore High Court seeking access to his petrol pump from the main road.The learned Single Judge in Chambers of the Lahore High Court, through a judgment dated 07.06.2017, allowed the respondent's petition, directing the petitioner to provide access points to the petrol pump from the main Lahore-Kasur Road in the form of entry and exit.The petitioner, dissatisfied with the judgment, filed an Intra Court Appeal before the Lahore High Court, which was subsequently dismissed through the impugned judgment dated 01.03.2018.In the present petition, the petitioner challenged the legality of the impugned judgment, contending that the respondent's petrol pump is not situated in front of the green belt like most other petrol pumps with direct access. Therefore, no discrimination arises, and the petitioner argued that the respondent was granted access from an alternate road, 360 feet away from the main road.The respondent, however, maintained that denial of direct access violated his fundamental right to have access to the highway.The Supreme Court, after hearing both parties, observed that the question of discrimination did not arise as other petrol pumps also had no direct access from the main road. The Court noted that the respondent's right to trade and business was not infringed as he still had access from an alternate route.The Court further held that the issue involved disputed questions of fact, which could not be decided in constitutional jurisdiction. It emphasized that extraordinary writ jurisdiction should be exercised only in exceptional circumstances, and in this case, the respondent had an adequate remedy available through the appropriate forum.Therefore, the Court converted the petition into an appeal, allowed it, and set aside the impugned judgments. The Court stated that the respondent could seek redressal of his grievance before the competent court, following the proper legal procedure.

M/s. Fateh Yarn (Pvt.) Ltd., Faisalabad. v. The Commissioner Inland Revenue, Faisalabad, etc

Citation: 2021 SCP 147, 2021 SCMR 1133

Case No: C.P.1972-L/2017

Judgment Date: 15/01/2021

Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of Pakistan

Judge: Mr. Justice Umar Ata Bandial

Summary: Tax/Sales Tax Act---Summary Pending

ABDUL KHALIQUE vs The STATE

Citation: 2023 PCrLJ 323

Case No: Criminal Bail Application No. S-648/2020

Judgment Date: 14/01/2021

Jurisdiction: Sindh High Court

Judge: Aftab Ahmed Gorar, J

Summary: Summary pending

Saad aftab Zia VS ZTBL etc

Citation: Pending

Case No: Writ Petition-3156-2019

Judgment Date: 14/01/2021

Jurisdiction: Islamabad High Court

Judge: Justice Aamer Farooq

Summary: (a) Constitution of Pakistan---- ----Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Service matter---Termination from ZTBL---Alleged incorrect/forged educational credentials---Petitioner was appointed as Vice President, Public Relations and Media Services in ZTBL pursuant to advertisement and appointment letter dated 13.11.2015---Respondent-bank required proof of educational qualifications and, upon finding discrepancies, issued show-cause notice and ultimately terminated petitioner’s services---High Court held that no illegality or impropriety was shown in termination memorandum warranting interference in constitutional jurisdiction. (b) Service law---- ----Appointment obtained on basis of educational qualifications---Verification of credentials---Effect---Employee was required to provide proof of educational qualifications after joining---Respondent-bank alleged that petitioner failed to provide matric certificate and proof of other qualifications, and that even bachelor’s degree was forged/incorrect---Such controversy regarding genuineness and verification of academic credentials could not be resolved by High Court in constitutional jurisdiction under Art.199. (c) Constitution of Pakistan---- ----Art. 199---Disputed questions of fact---Verification of educational certificate---Scope---High Court cannot undertake task of verifying academic credentials, certificate numbers, degrees or disputed factual claims regarding educational qualifications in writ jurisdiction---Where employer asserts that qualification documents are incorrect and employee contests the same, such factual verification is not ordinarily suitable for determination under Art.199. (d) Natural justice---- ----Opportunity of hearing---Termination from service---Record showing hearing granted---Petitioner contended that no opportunity of hearing was given before termination---Termination letter dated 14.07.2020 and handwritten note placed on record showed that petitioner was afforded opportunity to present his case---Plea of denial of hearing was not accepted. (e) Service law---- ----Show-cause notice---Hearing---Termination for alleged false credentials---Validity---Petitioner had earlier approached High Court and matter was disposed of with direction that he be provided opportunity of hearing---Respondent-bank complied with said direction and thereafter terminated petitioner’s services---Termination could not be interfered with merely on petitioner’s assertion that his qualifications were correct. (f) Constitution of Pakistan---- ----Art. 199---Judicial review of departmental/employer decision---Scope---Court in constitutional jurisdiction examines legality, jurisdictional error, procedural impropriety or violation of law; it does not sit as an investigating body to determine authenticity of disputed educational documents---No patent illegality was established against respondent-bank’s action. (g) Service law---- ----Re-advertisement of post after termination---Validity---Petitioner challenged re-advertisement of post on ground that his petition for reinstatement was pending---High Court held that after termination of petitioner’s services, respondent-bank was within its right to re-advertise and fill the post---Petitioner had no vested right requiring bank to keep post vacant until final culmination of litigation. (h) Service law---- ----Pending litigation by terminated employee---Employer’s right to fill post---Effect---Mere pendency of lis regarding reinstatement does not restrain employer from re-advertising or filling vacant post, unless some lawful interim protection or vested right is shown---No such right was established by petitioner. (i) Constitutional petition---- ----Termination and re-advertisement challenged through connected petitions---Common questions of law and fact---Both petitions involved petitioner’s employment with ZTBL, termination on account of disputed qualifications, and re-advertisement of the same post---High Court decided both petitions together and found them without substance. Disposition: W.P. No.3156 of 2019 and W.P. No.2011 of 2020 were dismissed; termination memorandum dated 14.07.2020 was maintained; ZTBL was held entitled to re-advertise the post after petitioner’s termination.

Collector of Customs, Model Custom Collectorate, Peshawar Vs Faisal Rasool

Citation: 2021 PTD 1360, PLJ 2022 Law N 25

Case No: Custom Reference No. 326-P /2169

Judgment Date: 14/01/2021

Jurisdiction: Peshawar High Court

Judge: Justice

Summary: Non-compliance of section 139 of Customs Act, 1969, would render the entire proceedings nullity in the eye of law and that too when respondent`s luggage was not taken into possession by the customs officials deputed for specific purpose at airport.

Disclaimer: AI/GPT is not a substitute for legal advice. The content on this website is for research only. In case of breach of T.O.S, PLDB reserves the right to revoke or ban membership at any time without notice. Pak Legal Database ® 2023-2026. All Rights Reserved. Version 4.05.2a. Designed & developed by theblinklabs.com

error: Content Protection Enabled
Scroll to Top