Summary: Senior Citizens matter---The petition sought directions for the enforcement of the Sindh Senior Citizens Welfare Act, 2014, aiming to improve the welfare of senior citizens in the province. The petitioners requested declarations and directions related to the establishment of old age homes, the formation of a Senior Citizens Welfare Fund, and the performance of duties outlined in the Act.The court acknowledged the significance of the Act in enhancing the living conditions of senior citizens and stressed the importance of its proper implementation. It noted that while a Council for the welfare of Senior Citizens had been constituted, further actions were necessary to ensure effective execution of the Act's provisions.The court directed the Council to move a summary to the Government of Sindh for the allocation of funds to establish the Senior Citizens Welfare Fund. Additionally, it mandated the Council to organize workshops and disseminate public awareness messages through media channels to inform senior citizens of their rights under the Act.Furthermore, the court instructed the Council to establish a complaint redressal committee and facilitate the issuance of Azadi Cards to senior citizens. It emphasized the need for comprehensive action plans for the protection of senior citizens' lives and properties, including the establishment of old age homes in each district.The Sindh Government was directed to prescribe a comprehensive action plan and establish old age homes, while the Chief Secretary was tasked with resolving issues related to obtaining data for Azadi Cards from NADRA.The court required the Sindh Government to submit progress reports within 60 days and directed the notification of rules within 45 days for the Act's implementation.

Summary: Pakistan Origin Card case---The petitioners sought the court's intervention to direct the respondents to renew the Pakistan Origin Card (POC) of petitioner No. 3. However, after its expiration, petitioner No. 3 encountered difficulties in renewing the card. The court noted that the respondents had previously issued a letter indicating their intention to cancel petitioner No. 3's POC under Section 19(d) of the NADRA (Pakistan Origin Card) Rules, 2002, based on security agency reports. Despite this, the petitioner continued to use the POC until its expiration in 2018, even traveling in and out of Pakistan using the same card. The court observed that the cancellation of the POC had been done without providing petitioner No. 3 with an opportunity for a fair hearing, and the petitioner's counsel pointed out that the petitioner had faced challenges during travel due to the expired POC. The Deputy Attorney General (D.A.G.) representing the respondents suggested that petitioner No. 3 be granted an opportunity to present their case to the Ministry of Interior for a fair hearing, after which a decision on the renewal of the POC could be made. The court accepted this proposal and directed the Ministry of Interior to provide petitioner No. 3 with a fair hearing within one month to determine whether the POC should be renewed. The Ministry was instructed to inform petitioner No. 3 of the date and time of the hearing and to present any allegations or grounds for non-renewal. The court noted that the Ministry's decision would be subject to appeal under Section 18 of the NADRA Ordinance 2000. The court concluded by disposing of the petition and instructed the court's office to communicate the order to the Deputy Attorney General and the Focal Person of the FIA (Federal Investigation Agency) for compliance.

Summary: In the absence of any substantial relief being matured, no consequential relief could be claimed, be that damages. Neither any jurisdictional error was highlighted nor the plaintiffs case is within the frame of such jurisdictional error hence plaintiffs case could not be isolated on such count alone.

Summary: (a) National Database Registration Authority Ordinance (VIII of 2000)-------S. 10---National Identity Card---Blockage of National Identity Card (CNIC)---Opportunity of hearing---Burden of proof---Scope---Plaintiff obtained manual nationalidentity card and thereafter, obtained CNIC (Computerized National Identity Card) fromNADRA (National Database Registration Authority)---On expiry of CNIC, the plaintiffapproached the Authority for renewal, which was refused on the ground that her CNIC hadbeen blocked---Record reflected that the plaintiff was duly registered by the Authority underthe National Database and Registration Authority Ordinance, 2000 and after fulfilling alllegal requirements the Authority had issued CNIC to the plaintiff---Plaintiff was admittedly acitizen by birth as such she was automatically a citizen of Pakistan---Burden of proof was onthe Authority to prove that the plaintiff was not a citizen of Pakistan---Mere verbal assertionwas no ground to deprive a person from his/her fundamental rights---Right guaranteed by theConstitution could not be taken away by notification---Authority had blocked CNIC of theplaintiff without any notice---Authority had acted arbitrarily and in a capricious manner---Authority had failed to discharge its burden regarding blockage of CNIC---Revision petitionwas accepted and the suit was decreed.(b) National Database Registration Authority Ordinance (VIII of 2000)-------S. 10---Constitution of Pakistan, Part II, Chap. 1 [Arts. 8 to 28]---National Identity Card---Fundamental rights---Blockage of National Identity Card (CNIC)---Effect---Blockage ofCNIC has grave consequences---It effects the person's life and is a denial of fundamentalrights as guaranteed by the Constitution---On cancellation or blockage of CNIC the personloses every fundamental right i.e. education, health, employment, etcetera.(c) Administration of justice-------No one can be condemned unheard.(d) Administration of justice-------Document cannot be refuted by verbal assertion.Abdul Ghani v. Mst. Yasmeen 2011 SCMR 837 ref.(e) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)-------Arts. 132 & 133---Cross-examination---Unchallenged portion of statement of witness---Evidentiary value---Scope---Where the statement of a witness goes unchallenged, it ispresumed to be admitted.