1989 PLP 22 (SCMR)
Haji MUHAMMAD SAIFULLAH KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 22 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Haleem, C.J., Aslam Riaz Hussain, Muhammad Afzal Zullah. Nasim Hasan Shah, Abdul Kadir Shaikh, Shafiur Rahman, Javid Iqbal, Ghulam Mujaddid Mirza, Saad Saood Jan, Usman Ali Shah, Ali Hussain Qazilbash and Naimuddin, JJ |
| Parties | Haji MUHAMMAD SAIFULLAH KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 22 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 22 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Haleem, C.J., Aslam Riaz Hussain, Muhammad Afzal Zullah. Nasim Hasan Shah, Abdul Kadir Shaikh, Shafiur Rahman, Javid Iqbal, Ghulam Mujaddid Mirza, Saad Saood Jan, Usman Ali Shah, Ali Hussain Qazilbash and Naimuddin, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 22 (SCMR) (Haji MUHAMMAD SAIFULLAH KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Sh. Shaukat Ali, Senior Advocate Supreme Court, Ch. Khalilur Rehman, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Saleem Ahmad Malik, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J.‑‑The petitioner in this petition has ;7 claimed the following reliefs: (a) The Delimitation of Constituencies (Amendment) Ordinance IV of 1988, promulgated on 21‑7‑1988, the Delimitation of Constituencies (Second Amendment) Ordinance VIII of 1988, and the Representation of the People (Amendment) Ordinance XIV of 1988, may be declared to be illegal and without lawful authority; (b) That the Election Commission headed by Mr. Justice S.A. Nusrat be declared to be illegally constituted and in consequence thereof it be declared that it is not competent to hold the elections scheduled to be 'geld on 16th and 19th of November, 1988, and all the steps, actions. notifications issued by the Election Commission, taken or purported to be taken be declared to be of no legal consequence; (c) That a direction may be issued for appointment of a Care‑taker Cabinet headed by a Prime Minister for the promulgation of necessary Ordinances and for proper constitution of the Election Commission; (d) A direction may also be made for fixation of fresh dates for holding of general elections; and (e) Any other relief which this august Court may deem fit be granted and the petitioner may also be awarded costs; Only one of such reliefs was sought in the earlier writ petition fled by the present petitioner in the High Court against whose order petitions were filed not only by the Federation of Pakistan and the Province of the Punjab but also by the present petitioner which were converted into appeals and disposed of by a short order on the 5th of October, 1988. The reasons m support of the order are yet to be rendered by the Court. Thereafter this petition has been filed under Article 184(3) Seeking the afore‑mentioned reliefs. The additional reliefs as are claimed now could have even been claimed in the earlier petition filed by the petitioner in the High Court which he failed to claim and one such similar relief is being dealt with by the Court in the reasons which are to be rendered in support of the short order. Therefore, he is debarred from claiming them now by reason of the principle embodied in Order 2 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Code. But the more formidable ground is that he has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 184(3) without alleging any infringement of his fundamental right for the enforcement of which he now seeks to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court. The learned counsel is unable to support the competency of the petition on this ground also. Accordingly, it is disposed of as incompetently filed. M.BA./M‑642/S ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Order accordingly.