2003 PLP 928 (SCMR)
Messrs SHIFA MEDICOS — Petitioner Versus WAFAQI MOHTASIB (OMBUDSMAN) and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2003 PLP 928 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Mian Muhammad Ajmal and Tanvir Ahmed Khan, JJ |
| Parties | Messrs SHIFA MEDICOS — Petitioner Versus WAFAQI MOHTASIB (OMBUDSMAN) and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Establishment of the Office of Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) Order (1 of 1983) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP 928 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Establishment of the Office of Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) Order (1 of 1983) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP 928 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Mian Muhammad Ajmal and Tanvir Ahmed Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP 928 (SCMR) (Messrs SHIFA MEDICOS — Petitioner Versus WAFAQI MOHTASIB (OMBUDSMAN) and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sh. Ziaullah, Senior Advocate Supreme Court with Syed Abul Aasim Jafri, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 25th June, 2002.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 13-10-1999 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Writ Petition No. 14892 of 1994).
Art. 32
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts. 185(3) & 199-- Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court
Order passed by Wafaqi Mohtasib
Adequate remedy against such orders
Grievance of the petitioner was that the High Court declined to interfere, in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction, with the order passed by Wafaqi Mohtasib-- Validity
Adequate .remedy was available to the petitioner under Art. 32 of Establishment of Office of Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) Order, 1983, against the order of Wafaqi Mohtasib
Supreme Court declined to take any exception against the order. passed by High Court whereby discretionary relief was declined
Leave to appeal was refused. Nemo for- Respondents.
Judgment & Decree
Art. 32
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts. 185(3) & 199-- Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court
Order passed by Wafaqi Mohtasib
Adequate remedy against such orders
Grievance of the petitioner was that the High Court declined to interfere, in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction, with the order passed by Wafaqi Mohtasib-- Validity
Adequate .remedy was available to the petitioner under Art. 32 of Establishment of Office of Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) Order, 1983, against the order of Wafaqi Mohtasib
Supreme Court declined to take any exception against the order. passed by High Court whereby discretionary relief was declined
Leave to appeal was refused. Sh. Ziaullah, Senior Advocate Supreme Court with Syed Abul Aasim Jafri, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for- Respondents. Date of hearing: 25th June, 2002. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the leave granting order in Civil Appeal No.650 of 1993 arising out of C.P. No.474 of 1993 reported as Almas Khanum v: Fedaration of Pakistan and 4 others (PLD 1994 SC 91), which -was dismissed as withdrawn on 29-6-1994. Learned High, Court placing reliance on Water and Power Development Authority and others v. Commissioner, Hazara Division and others (1992 SCMR 2102) observed that adequate remedy was available under Article 32 of Establishment of the Office of Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) Order, 1983, against the order of Wafaqi Mohtasib and refused to issue writ prayed for. No exception can be taken against the impugned order of the High Court whereby discretionary relief was declined. Finding no merits, this petition is dismissed and leave is refused. Q.M.H./S-209/S Petition dismissed.