1979 PLP 478 (SCMR)
MARTIAL LAW ADMINISTRATOR, ZONE `B' AND 2 OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus SATTAR GUL AND ANOTHER‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1979 PLP 478 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MARTIAL LAW ADMINISTRATOR, ZONE `B' AND 2 OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus SATTAR GUL AND ANOTHER‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1979 PLP 478 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1979 PLP 478 (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: 1979 PLP 478 (SCMR) (MARTIAL LAW ADMINISTRATOR, ZONE `B' AND 2 OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus SATTAR GUL AND ANOTHER‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Irshad Hussan Khan, Deputy Attorney‑General for Pakistan, Syed Ibne Ali, Additional Advocate‑General, N.‑W. F. P. and Amir Zada Khan, Advocate -on‑Record/Assistant Advocate‑General, N: W. F. P. Peshawar for Petitioners.
- Khan Khalilur Rahman Khan, Advocate and Mahmmood A. Qureshi, Advocate‑ on‑Record for Respondents.
- Date of hearing : 22nd July 1979.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Peshawar High Court dated 11th of July, 1979 in Writ Petition No. 98 of 1979). ‑‑‑ Art. 185(3)‑Special leave to appeal to Supreme Court‑Petition filed for special leave to appeal against a majority judgment of High Court accepting 16 writ petitions filed by a number of persons includ ing two respondents in instant case‑Petitioner also filing a miscella neous application for suspension of operation of impugned judgment Petitioners having filed petition for special leave only against two respondents in instant case, Court, held, seized of matter only in so far as it affected such two respondents‑Decision of miscellaneous application involving determination of complicated questions of law, including interpretation of Supreme Court's judgment (P L D 1977 S C 657) relating to scope of Courts to adjudicate upon actions of Govern ment and Martial Law authorities on touchstone of doctrine of neces sity and likely to affect a large number of cases, matter, held, requires to be placed before a larger Bench of three or more Judges and in meanwhile operation of impugned judgment suspended as against respondents in instant case, leaving question of extension of interim relief to be considered at hearing of main petition if necessary.
Judgment & Decree
The Martial Law Administrator, Zone B', and others, have filed a petition for special leave to appeal against the majority judgment of the Peshawar High Court dated 11th of July 1979, whereby 16 writ petitions filed by a number of persons including the two respondents in the present petition, were accepted.
2. Along with the petition for leave to appeal the petitioners have also filed a miscellaneous application for suspension of the operation of the impugned judgment, which has come up for hearing after notice to the respondents.
3. It is agreed by the learned counsel for both sides that since the petitioners have filed the P. S. L. A. only against Sattar Gul and Zafeer Gull respondents, this Court is seized of the matter only so far as it affects the aforementioned two respondents.
4. On hearing learned counsel for the parties, I find that the decision of the miscellaneous application involves determination of complicated ques tions of law, including interpretation of the judgment of this Court in Begum Nusrat Bhutto's case (P L D 1977 S C 657) relating to the scope of the Courts co-adjudicate upon the actions of the Government and Martial Law Authorities on the touch stone of the doctrine of necessity. The decision is likely to affect a large number of cases. I, therefore feel that this matter should be placed before a larger Bench consisting of three or more Judges.
5. In the meanwhile the miscellaneous application is accepted to the extent that the operation of the impugned judgment is suspended till the 15th of October 1979, only so far as it affects the two respondents. The main petition is likely to be heard and decided by the aforementioned date. The question of the 'extension of the interim relief would, if necessary, be considered at the hearing of the main petition. Application partly accepted.