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)
KHADIM HUSSAIN OTHERSS VS COLLECTOR L ACQUISITION MANGLA DAM
Summary: Summary pending.
BAGHTAWAR VS SAWAB KHAN
Summary: Summary pending.
SAGHIR AHMAD VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY MINISTRY OF WATER POWER ISLAMABAD
Summary: Summary pending.
JAN ISFABI EXECUTIVE ENGINEER I OTHERSS VS THE STATE
Summary: Summary pending.
Noor-ul-Qamar Vs State etc
Summary: S.302,324,452,34 PPCBail on medical ground (Bail allowed)
Nabi Gul VS The State
Summary: S.302,201,203 PPC,13 AOCircumstantial evidence, effected recovery of weapon (Appeal dismissed)
Banaras Shah Vs State etcB.A No. 1814-P of Banaras Shah Vs State etc
Summary: S. 302,34 PP Cross version (Bail allowed)
CH. BASHARAT ALI VSP.T.C.L. ETC
Summary: The case involved a group of employees from the Telephone & Telegraph Department in Pakistan who were terminated from their positions. The termination followed their request for a government-announced adhoc allowance in 2010. The employees argued that they should be governed by statutory rules and were protected by specific laws that preserved their terms and conditions of service when the Pakistan Telecommunication Corporation was established. The court examined these legal provisions and precedent cases, including the Masood Ahmad Bhatti case, and concluded that the employees' services should indeed be governed by statutory rules. The court found the employees' dismissals to be without lawful authority and ordered their reinstatement, while also acknowledging that the respondents could proceed against the employees according to the law. The court ruled in favor of the employees, declaring their dismissals unlawful and ordering their reinstatement, with the condition that any further proceedings must be carried out in accordance with the law.
PARVEEN BIBI VSSTATE
Summary: In the trial, it was necessary for the prosecution to establish by cogent evidence that the seized substance "Bhang" 20-kilograms was recovered from the possession of the accused and was kept in the safe custody. Mere oral evidence of the prosecution witnesses as to the seized substance "Bhang" weighing 20-Kilograms does not discharge the heavy burden which lies on the prosecution. Since there was inherent illegality in the matter, the conviction cannot be upheld and finding in this regard is required to be set aside. Criminal appeal accepted.
SAGHIR AHMAD VS FOP ETC
Summary: The case involved a dispute related to the appointment and employment of the petitioner, who was initially an employee of WAPDA and later worked with LESCO (Lahore Electric Supply Company) in a Human Resource and Administration Director role. The judgment discusses various aspects of the case, including the authority of LESCO to make employment decisions, the nature of the petitioner's employment, and the legality of the decisions made regarding the petitioner's employment.The court ruled that LESCO, as an independent corporate entity, has the authority to appoint and determine the terms and conditions of its employees, and the decisions made by its Board of Directors regarding the petitioner's employment were within their discretion. The court also emphasized that without statutory rules governing the terms and conditions of employment, a constitutional petition filed by an employee may not be maintainable. Therefore, the petition was dismissed.