1991 PLP 1508 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD SHAFI — Petitioner Versus CHAIRMAN, UNION COUNCIL and 2 others — Respondents.
| Citation | 1991 PLP 1508 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SHAFI — Petitioner Versus CHAIRMAN, UNION COUNCIL and 2 others — Respondents. |
| Primary Law | Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VIII of 1961) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 1508 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VIII of 1961) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 1508 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 1508 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD SHAFI — Petitioner Versus CHAIRMAN, UNION COUNCIL and 2 others — Respondents.). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Miss Hina Jilani for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.
- Malik Ashiq Hussain for Respondent No.3.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 9
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199
Alternative adequate remedy available
Maintainability of Constitutional petition
Petitioner, before invoking Constitutional remedy not availing statutory remedy available under law-- Effect
Certificate of maintenance issued by Arbitration Council against petitioner was never challenged by him in revision before Collector
Such remedy though available was not availed of by petitioner nor any explanation was furnished on record, for such omission
Constitutional jurisdiction could be invoked only if there was no other adequate remedy available to petitioner-- Constitutional petition being not maintainable was dismissed in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Miss Hina Jilani for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents Nos. 1 and
2. Malik Ashiq Hussain for Respondent No.3. Date of hearing: 18th February, 1991. This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 calls in question the order of the Arbitration Council Ward No.7, at Pattoki Tehsil Chunian, District Kasur, dated 17th May, 1990 whereby the petitioner was directed to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,000 per month to his wife Mst. Yasmin respondent No.3 herein w.e.f.18-1-1988.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the application filed by the respondent No.3 before the Chairman of Ward No.7, Pattoki was not maintainable as respondent No.3 was resident of Ward No.14 and not 7 and, therefore, Arbitration Council Ward No.7 lacked territorial jurisdiction to try the application filed by respondent No.3. In this respect reliance has been placed by the learned counsel upon a copy of a statement made by respondent No.3 before a Magistrate wherein she is shown to be resident of Ward No.14 Pattoki.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent apart from disputing the correctness of the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner has raised preliminary objection that this petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has not availed of the statutory remedy available to him of filing an appeal against the impugned order.
4. According to section 9 of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 a certificate of maintenance issued by the Arbitration Council can be challenged by the aggrieved party by filing a revision before the District Collector. In the present case admittedly, this remedy has not been availed of nor is any explanation forthcoming on the record for this omission. The jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution can be invoked only if there is no other adequate remedy available to the petitioner. For the reasons aforesaid this petition is not maintainable and is dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs. AA./M-2877/L Petition dismissed.