SCMR 1970

1970 PLP 90 (SCMR)

Sheikh BASHIR AHMAD-Petitioner Versus RAHIMUDDIN AND ANOTHER-Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
High Court
Decided Date
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 239 of 1967, decided on 4th October 1967.
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1970 PLP 90 (SCMR)
Forum / Court High Court
Bench Members N/A
Parties Sheikh BASHIR AHMAD-Petitioner Versus RAHIMUDDIN AND ANOTHER-Respondents
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1970 PLP 90 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1970 PLP 90 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1970 PLP 90 (SCMR) (Sheikh BASHIR AHMAD-Petitioner Versus RAHIMUDDIN AND ANOTHER-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Representation

  • A. S. Salam, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Masood Akhtar, Attorney for Petitioner.
  • Nemo for Respondents.
  • Date of hearing : 4th October 1967.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 3rd May 1967, in Writ petition No. 1678 of 1966). Electoral College Rules, 1964, r. 34-Interpretation of rule- Special Leave to Appeal granted by Supreme Court to consider.

Judgment & Decree

S. A. RAHMAN, J.‑The question raised in this petition for special leave to appeal from an order passed by the High Court in Writ Jurisdiction concerns the correct interpretation to be placed on Rule 34 of the Electoral College Rules, 1964. The High Court has apparently expressed contradictory views on this question, in two writ petitions. The contention raised that the High Court was in error in holding that the rule applied to the present case, merits consideration. We grant leave to appeal as prayed. The petitioner will furnish security in the sum of Rs. 1,000 for costs before the appeal is set down for hearing. Proceedings , before the Controlling Authority in consequence of the order of the High Court will continue to remain under stay meanwhile. Leave granted.