2002 PLP 1401 (SCMR)
CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ASHFAQ AHMED and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2002 PLP 1401 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Munir A. Sheikh, Tanvir Ahmed Khan and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ. |
| Parties | CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ASHFAQ AHMED and others‑‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 1401 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PLP 1401 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Munir A. Sheikh, Tanvir Ahmed Khan and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ..
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 1401 (SCMR) (CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ASHFAQ AHMED and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Talib H. Rizvi, Senior Advocate Supreme Court with C.M. Lateef, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- A.K. Dogar, Advocate Supreme Court and Jehangir A. Jhoja, Advocate Supreme Court with S. Abul Aasim Jafri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents.
- Muhammad Rashid Ahmed, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent No.49.
- Naeem Akhtar, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent No.52.
- Date of hearing: 21st February, 2002.
- Mr. A.K. Dogar, learned Advocate Supreme Court appearing for the respondents/caveators, has no objection if such a direction is issued.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 15‑7‑1999 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Writ Petition No. 1500 of 1976). Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑Art.185(3) & 199‑‑‑High Court allowing amendment in Constitutional petition‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Supreme Court with the consent of parties disposed of the petition as withdrawn with direction that High Court would decide Constitutional petition expeditiously and petitioner would be at liberty to raise, factual and legal pleas against maintainability or otherwise of Constitutional petition including those already raised in reply to application for amendment.
Judgment & Decree
MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.‑‑‑Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if an observation/direction is made to the High Court that the petitioner is not debarred from raising factual and legal pleas in reply to the amended writ petition including those which he has already taken in reply to the application seeking amendment of the writ petition and the same are decided independently by the High Court on merits, he would not press this petition for through the impugned order an amendment in the writ petition' has been allowed to decided the questions raised therein and even in defence effectively and substantially. Mr. A.K. Dogar, learned Advocate Supreme Court appearing for the respondents/caveators, has no objection if such a direction is issued. In view of the above statement made by the learned counsel, this petition is disposed of as withdrawn with the direction that the High Court shall decide the Writ Petition expeditiously and the petitioner shall be at liberty to raise factual and legal pleas against maintainability or otherwise of the writ petition including those already raised in reply to the application seeking amendment. S.A.K./C‑56/S Petition disposed of.