2001 PLP 131 (MLD)
GUL BAZ KHAN and 2 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, HOME AND
| Citation | 2001 PLP 131 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | Tariq Pervez and Abdur Rauf Khan Luqhmani, JJ |
| Parties | GUL BAZ KHAN and 2 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, HOME AND |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2001 PLP 131 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2001 PLP 131 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: Tariq Pervez and Abdur Rauf Khan Luqhmani, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2001 PLP 131 (MLD) (GUL BAZ KHAN and 2 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, HOME AND). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Waris Khan for Petitioners.
- Syed Sardar Hussain for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 19th September, 199
Headnotes / Summary
North‑West Frontier Province Pre‑emption Act (XIV of 1950)‑‑‑. ‑‑S.5(c)‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts. 199, 203‑D(2) & 203‑F (2)‑‑‑Suit for Pre‑emption‑‑Exemption from Pre‑emption ‑‑‑Held, decision of Supreme Court, Government of N.‑W.F.P. v. Said Kamai Shah PLD 1986 SC 360, wherein provisions of S.5(c) of North‑West Frontier Province pre‑emption Act, 1950 were declared to be un‑Islamic, could not be given effect to before 31‑7‑1986‑‑‑Principles.
Judgment & Decree
Writ Petition No .1010 of 1997, decided on 19th September, 2000. North‑West Frontier Province Pre‑emption Act (XIV of 1950)‑‑‑. ‑‑S.5(c)‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts. 199, 203‑D(2) & 203‑F (2)‑‑‑Suit for Pre‑emption‑‑Exemption from Pre‑emption ‑‑‑Held, decision of Supreme Court, Government of N.‑W.F.P. v. Said Kamai Shah PLD 1986 SC 360, wherein provisions of S.5(c) of North‑West Frontier Province pre‑emption Act, 1950 were declared to be un‑Islamic, could not be given effect to before 31‑7‑1986‑‑‑Principles. Muhammad Waris Khan for Petitioners. Syed Sardar Hussain for Respondents. Date of hearing: 19th September, 199
2. Mr. Waris Khan, the learned counsel for the petitioner, voiced grievance that all the three forums, namely respondents Nos. l to 3 failed to take into account the decision of the Supreme Court in case of Government of N.‑W.F.P. v. Said‑Kamal Shah (PLD 1986 SC 360) wherein the provision of section 5(c) of the N.‑W.F.P. Pre‑emption Act, 1950 was declared un- Islamic. He maintained that change in Pre‑emption Law is applicable to pending matter. In other words, he wanted us to give retrospective effect to the decision of the Supreme Court.
3. Clause (2) of Article 203‑D of the Constitution, which is also applicable by virtue of Article 203‑F(2), makes it obligatory, to specify the date on which the decision shall take effect. However, no such decision shall be deemed to be effective before the expiry of three months within which an appeal has been preferred to the Supreme Court or, an appeal has been so preferred, before the disposal of such appeal. In others words, the decision of the Supreme Court regarding section 5(c) of the N.‑W.F.P. Pre‑emption Act could not be given effect before 31‑7‑1986. Another insurmountable hurdle in the way of the petitioners is change in pre‑emption law is taken to be retrospective, that would not benefit the petitioners, rather it will further damage their case, in that, under the provision of the N.‑W. F. P. Pre emption Act, 1987, the petitioners have admittedly not fulfilled conditions of talabs. Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed, being without merits. H.B.T./178/P Petition dismissed.