Summary: (a) Constitution of Pakistan----Art.212(3)---Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973---Departmental proceedings---Scope of interference by Federal Service Tribunal---Where inquiry had been conducted in accordance with law, adequate opportunity of defence had been afforded and findings were supported by material available on record, Tribunal could not arbitrarily interfere with penalty or substitute its own conclusions merely because another view of evidence was possible---Departmental proceedings were distinct from criminal proceedings and Tribunal was not to act as an appellate forum for fresh reassessment of evidence after requirements of due process had been satisfied. Cited Cases: • Director General, Directorate General of Training and Research (Inland Revenue), Lahore v. Ijaz Younas 2021 SCMR 710 • Saboor Khan v. Chairman WAPDA 2021 SCMR 667 (b) Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973---Departmental inquiry---Due process---Respondent was served with charge-sheet and statement of allegations, submitted written reply, participated throughout inquiry, was informed of rights available under Rules, was afforded opportunity to cross-examine departmental witnesses, received show-cause notice and was granted personal hearing before competent authority---No violation of any mandatory legal provision or denial of reasonable opportunity of defence was established---Inquiry proceedings were conducted in accordance with law. (c) Evidence---Cross-examination---Departmental witnesses not challenged---Evidentiary effect---Where witness was not cross-examined on material portion of testimony, such statement ordinarily deserved acceptance as true unless displaced by reliable contrary evidence---Respondent was expressly afforded opportunity to cross-examine all departmental witnesses but consciously declined to avail it---Testimony concerning harassment, blackmail, indecent photographs, objectionable associations and immoral conduct therefore remained unrebutted and could legitimately be relied upon by Inquiry Committee. Cited Cases: • Mst. Nur Jehan Begum through Legal Representatives v. Syed Mujtaba Ali Naqvi 1991 SCMR 2300 • Sheraz Tufail v. The State 2007 SCMR 518 • Ishfaq Ahmed v. Mushtaq Ahmed and others PLD 2025 SC 582 (d) Departmental proceedings---Voluntary confession by delinquent employee---Evidentiary value---Respondent made detailed signed statement before Inquiry Committee after being informed of his rights, expressly declaring that it was made willingly and without pressure or duress---He admitted involvement in immoral and illicit activities and furnished particulars thereof---Confession was never retracted during inquiry nor was coercion, threat, inducement or mala fide alleged before competent authority---Respondent subsequently admitted misconduct during personal hearing and sought pardon---Such admissions constituted substantive evidence and independently supported conclusion that respondent had rendered himself unsuitable for retention in service. (e) Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973---Departmental misconduct---Standard of proof---“Some evidence” rule---Findings of Inquiry Committee were supported by oral testimony of several witnesses, voluntary confession of respondent and subsequent admissions before competent authority---Such material satisfied requirement of “some evidence” necessary to sustain departmental findings---Findings could not be characterized as arbitrary, capricious, perverse or based on no evidence. (f) Departmental inquiry---Misconduct of immoral nature---Absence of documentary evidence---Effect---Tribunal erred in treating want of documentary evidence as fatal---Misconduct involving personal conduct, objectionable associations, harassment and immoral activities could be proved through oral testimony, admissions, surrounding circumstances and conduct of delinquent employee---Law did not require documentary proof of every allegation in disciplinary proceedings. (g) Civil service---Conduct before regularization and during service---Relevance---Tribunal attached undue significance to fact that some incidents related to period before respondent’s regular appointment---Inquiry record also contained material showing continuation of objectionable conduct during service---Earlier incidents, when forming part of continuing pattern of misconduct extending into service, could not be discarded merely because some conduct preceded regularization. (h) Constitution of Pakistan----Art.212(3)---Federal Service Tribunal---Reappraisal of departmental evidence---Jurisdictional limits---Tribunal failed to appreciate unrebutted witness testimony, voluntary confession and subsequent admissions and substituted its own assessment for conclusions of disciplinary authority---Such reassessment exceeded lawful limits of Tribunal’s jurisdiction where inquiry was fair and findings were supported by ample material. Disposition---Petition for leave to appeal converted into appeal and allowed---Judgment dated 22.10.2024 passed by Federal Service Tribunal set aside---Order dated 30.08.2021 imposing major penalty of dismissal from service, as maintained in departmental appeal on 14.10.2021, restored. Additional Director Civilian Personnel, Air Headquarters, Peshawar and others v. Muzafar Masih, Civil Petition No.5857 of 2024, Supreme Court of Pakistan, heard on 21.05.2026 and announced on 19.06.2026, approved for reporting.

Summary: Licence is needed only if the police judge the procession a threat to peace.

Summary: 1. Maintaining daily case diaries is a strict statutory obligation. Unexplained gaps in documentation and failing to initiate proper absconder proceedings shatter the presumption of a prompt and fair investigation. Furthermore, mechanically freezing cross-version proceedings is patently lopsided and frustrates the investigating officer's fundamental duty to neutrally discover the actual facts. 2. Investigations must conclude within the statutory fourteen days. Inordinate delays fundamentally violate the constitutional right to a fair trial. Burying police files for years exposes a shocking systemic paralysis, reflecting a total breakdown of internal police supervision and a lack of external judicial oversight by the Magistrate. 3. Supervisory police authorities are directed to meticulously audit their jurisdictions to identify and immediately rectify any ongoing investigative delays. Proactive steps are mandated to enforce statutory timelines, daily diary maintenance, and consolidated cross-version investigations. A comprehensive compliance report regarding these corrective measures must be submitted to the High Court within thirty days. 4. Post-arrest bail is safely granted where the alleged offences do not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C., making "bail, not jail" the governing rule and refusal an exception. This applies with greater force when an unexplained seven-day delay in lodging the FIR points toward prior deliberation and consultation, the investigation is complete and no exceptional circumstances exist to justify treating the case as an exception.

Summary: (a) Sales Tax Act, 1990----Ss.7 & 8(1)(b)---“Stock-in-trade”---Term not defined in statute---Interpretation of undefined commercial and taxation expression---Where an expression used in taxation or commercial legislation was not statutorily defined, its meaning was to be determined contextually by reference to legal, commercial, accounting and taxation usage---Ordinary English dictionaries, particularly those containing general or figurative meanings, could not conclusively determine the legal character of an asset used in business---Court was required to consider nature of business, actual use of asset, statutory scheme and relevant commercial practice---Meaning of “stock-in-trade” depended upon function for which goods were held and could not be determined merely from their physical description. (b) Sales Tax Act, 1990----S.8(1)(b)---Stock-in-trade---Plant and machinery---Functional test---Stock-in-trade ordinarily meant inventory, raw material, work in progress, finished goods or other goods and services normally held or offered for sale by a business---Plant and machinery constituted apparatus kept for permanent employment in carrying on business and did not form part of stock-in-trade---Functional test was whether subject asset was itself dealt with and sold in ordinary course of business or was an apparatus employed for carrying on business---Generator installed and used to provide power for manufacturing taxable supplies was an adjunct to industrial operations and constituted plant and machinery, not stock-in-trade, unless business itself consisted of trading in generators. Cited Cases: • Yarmouth v. France [1887] 19 QBD 647 • Benson v. The Yard Arm Club Ltd. 53 TC 67 (c) Taxation---Stock-in-trade and capital asset---Circulating capital and fixed capital---Distinction---Stock-in-trade formed part of circulating capital from which businessman earned profit by selling or parting with it, whereas plant and machinery formed part of fixed capital retained and employed to produce income---Nature of trade and purpose for which asset was held constituted determining factors---Machinery used by manufacturer to produce articles for sale was fixed capital, while machinery purchased by a machinery dealer for resale was circulating capital---Industrial generator imported, installed and retained for generating energy in manufacturing process was a fixed capital asset and not stock-in-trade---Same generator would constitute stock-in-trade where imported or acquired for sale and supply in ordinary course of business. Cited Cases: • Golden Horse Shoe (New) Limited v. Thurgood [1934] 1 KB 548 • Assam Bengal Cement Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-Tax, West Bengal AIR 1955 SC 89 • John Smith v. Moore [1921] 12 TC 266 (d) Sales Tax Act, 1990----S.8(1)(b)---Plant and machinery treated as stock-in-trade---Attock Cement case---Reconsideration by Larger Bench---Conclusion in Attock Cement Pakistan Ltd. that plant and machinery could be construed as stock-in-trade was based upon over-extension of general dictionary meanings and erroneous conflation of industrial apparatus with circulating capital---Treating everything used within factory as stock-in-trade would neutralize statutory authority of Federal Government to restrict input tax adjustment and lead to an absurd result---Courts were required to distinguish between goods held for sale and apparatus used to manufacture goods---Rule laid down in Attock Cement, to extent that plant and machinery constituted stock-in-trade, was declared erroneous in law and on facts. Overruled to the extent stated: • Attock Cement Pakistan Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Collectorate of Customs and Central Excise, Quetta and others 1999 PTD 1892 (e) Sales Tax Act, 1990----S.8(1)(b)---S.R.O. No.578(I)/98, dated 12.06.1998, Serial No.6, as substituted by S.R.O. No.677(I)/2000, dated 28.09.2000---Input tax on generators and generating sets---Federal Government was empowered to specify goods, acquired otherwise than as stock-in-trade, in respect of which input tax could not be claimed---Generators and generating sets were included among restricted goods, but generators of 250 KVA or above acquired by registered manufacturer for use in manufacture of taxable supplies were expressly excluded from such restriction---Generator of 1150 KVA imported, installed and used by respondent for manufacturing taxable supplies fell within said exception and was not included among goods in respect of which input tax adjustment was prohibited. (f) Sales Tax Act, 1990----Ss.7 & 8(1)(b)---Value Added Tax mechanism---Input tax adjustment---Right to adjust input tax against output tax constituted fundamental substantive mechanism of value-added taxation under Sales Tax Act, 1990---Notification restricting such right was to be construed according to statutory purpose and precise classification of goods---Industrial generator remained plant and machinery and fixed capital, but entitlement to input tax adjustment arose from specific exception created for generators of 250 KVA or above used in manufacture of taxable supplies, and not because such generator constituted stock-in-trade. (g) Sales Tax Act, 1990----S.8(1)(b)---S.R.O. No.677(I)/2000, dated 28.09.2000---Beneficial amendment---Curative and clarificatory notification---Retrospective operation---Amending notification distinguished industrial generators of 250 KVA or above, used in manufacture of taxable supplies, from ordinary generators and removed anomaly contained in earlier notification---Amendment conferred benefit upon importers of industrial generators and was curative and clarificatory in nature---Such notification was to operate retrospectively and its benefit extended to generator imported by respondent before issuance of amendment---Tax authorities and Appellate Tribunal erred in treating amendment as purely prospective. Disposition---Civil appeal partially allowed---Finding in Attock Cement Pakistan Ltd. that plant and machinery constituted stock-in-trade declared erroneous in law and on facts---Reliance placed by Peshawar High Court upon said precedent for treating industrial generator as stock-in-trade held misplaced and contrary to law---Orders of Tax Authorities and Customs, Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, to extent they treated S.R.O. No.677(I)/2000 as prospective, disapproved---S.R.O. No.677(I)/2000 declared curative and clarificatory and given retrospective effect---Benefit thereof extended to import of 1150 KVA generator made by respondent. Commissioner Inland Revenue (Legal), LTU, Islamabad and another v. M/s Syntronics (Ltd.), Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Civil Appeal No.1227 of 2014, Supreme Court of Pakistan (Larger Bench), heard on 20.02.2026, approved for reporting.

Summary: 17-A of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974

Summary: (a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001----S.15---Transfer of Property Act, 1882---Registration Act, 1908---Sale of mortgaged immovable property by financial institution---Statutory scheme before S.15 was struck down---Section 15 empowered financial institution to sell mortgaged property through public auction without first obtaining a decree and treated sale certificate and attestation of mutation as sufficient to transfer title---Such mechanism constituted departure from general law under which transfer of immovable property of prescribed value required execution and registration of a conveyance. (b) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001----S.15---Provision declared ultra vires Constitution---Legal effect---A statutory provision declared unconstitutional was ordinarily treated as void ab initio, as though it had never validly existed---Court could nevertheless temper consequences through prospective overruling and protect past and closed transactions---Transactions which remained pending, unperfected or under judicial challenge did not acquire immunity merely because they commenced before declaration of invalidity and could still be examined in light of constitutional position. Cited Cases: • Muhammad Umer Rathor v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 2009 Lahore 268 • National Bank of Pakistan and 117 others v. Saf Textile Mills Ltd. and another PLD 2014 SC 283 (c) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001----S.15---Auction sale conducted before provision was declared ultra vires---Past and closed transaction---Test---Auction did not constitute a past and closed transaction where sale remained under judicial challenge, physical possession was never taken by Bank or delivered to auction purchaser and no registered sale deed was executed---Transaction had not attained finality and constitutional invalidity of statutory provision therefore remained fully applicable to pending proceedings. (d) Transfer of Property Act, 1882---Registration Act, 1908---Auction of immovable property---Absence of registered sale deed---Effect upon title---Mutation entered in favour of auction purchaser was fiscal in nature and did not by itself create, confer or extinguish proprietary title---In absence of duly executed and registered conveyance, auction purchaser did not acquire complete or enforceable proprietary interest in immovable property---Sale certificate or revenue mutation could not substitute mandatory registered instrument once statutory foundation permitting such mode had ceased to be legally available. (e) Revenue record---Mutation---Evidentiary and proprietary effect---Mutation entries were maintained primarily for fiscal purposes and neither conferred nor divested title---Transfer of ownership in immovable property had to be perfected through legally recognized conveyance---Mutation in favour of auction purchaser, standing alone, did not establish valid title. (f) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001----S.15---Auction sale---Possession remaining with mortgagor/judgment-debtor---Effect---Bank never assumed physical possession of mortgaged property and possession was never delivered to auction purchaser---Continued possession of judgment-debtor demonstrated that auction transaction had not been fully worked out or perfected---Absence of both registered conveyance and delivery of possession rendered alleged title legally infirm. (g) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001----Ss.9 & 15(10)---Objection proceedings before Banking Court---Judgment-debtor challenged auction while Bank sought adjustment of liability on basis of sale---Banking Court was required to examine whether auction had culminated in lawful and perfected transfer and whether statutory foundation supporting sale remained operative---Where provision authorizing recovery mechanism had been struck down and transfer was incomplete under general property law, objection petition could not be rejected merely because auction and mutation had taken place. (h) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001----S.15---Banking Court and subordinate forums---Effect of constitutional declaration---Once S.15 was declared ultra vires, statutory foundation of impugned recovery mechanism ceased to exist for transactions which had not attained finality---Subordinate forums were bound to give effect to declared constitutional position and could not validate an unperfected auction by continuing to rely upon invalidated provision. (i) Constitution of Pakistan---Execution proceedings---Competing rights of decree-holder, judgment-debtor and third-party auction purchaser---Principle of proportionality---Courts were required to balance enforcement rights of decree-holder with protection of judgment-debtor while remaining vigilant regarding interests of bona fide third-party purchaser---Execution law was not to be applied so as to disregard either sanctity of property law or equities arising from good-faith participation in auction. (j) Contract Act, 1872---Restitution---Bona fide auction purchaser---Auction later rendered legally ineffective---Purchaser had paid full consideration through process conducted under colour of lawful authority and mutation had been entered in his favour, but title failed due to absence of registered sale deed and invalidity of S.15---Although purchaser could not retain property, he could not be left remediless where no fraud or collusion was attributable to him---Restitution was necessary to prevent unjust enrichment and restore purchaser, as nearly as possible, to position occupied before defective transaction. (k) Restitution---Refund of auction price---Mark-up---Bona fide auction purchaser was entitled to return of amount deposited towards purchase together with mark-up at prevailing banking rate from date of deposit until actual payment---Monetary restitution reconciled invalidity of title with equitable protection of innocent purchaser for value. Disposition---Civil Appeal No.232-L of 2017 filed by Zarai Taraqiati Bank Limited dismissed---High Court judgment setting aside Banking Court’s order and accepting judgment-debtor’s objections maintained---Civil Appeal No.1553 of 2017 filed by auction purchaser partly allowed---Auction purchaser held not entitled to sustain title but declared entitled to restitution of deposited purchase price together with mark-up at prevailing banking rate from date of deposit until payment. Zarai Taraqiati Bank Ltd. v. Sher Muhammad and another; Sikandar Khan v. Sher Muhammad and another, Civil Appeals Nos.232-L and 1553 of 2017, Supreme Court of Pakistan, heard on 04.05.2026, approved for reporting.

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Article 199(3) of the Constitution?Armed Forces service matter?Compulsory retirement due to fault of officer?Constitutional petition not maintainable. Retirement order upheld under the Pakistan Army Act, 1952, Pakistan Army Act Rules, 1954 and Pension Regulations, 2010. Further held that a note or an explanation cannot be equated with the substantive provision to which it is appended; rights and liabilities can only be spelled out from the substantive provision and not from an explanation or note; even an explanation or note cannot be pressed into service to vary or alter scope of the main provision but if there occurs any ambiguity or obscurity in the provision, the legislature may, through a note or explanation, remove or clarify such ambiguity or obscurity.

Summary: The validating amendments to the Punjab Revenue Authority Act, 2012 (PRA Act), introduced through the Punjab Revenue Authority (Amendment) Act, 2016 which came into force on 06.02.2016 with retrospective effect from 01.07.2012, and the Punjab Revenue Authority (Second Amendment) Act, 2016 dated 06.09.2016, are not only within the legislative competence of the Provincial Legislature but have also validly and effectively cured the defects identified in the case of "Institute of Architects, Pakistan (Lahore Chapter) V. Province of Punjab and others" (PLD 2016 Lahore 321).