1990 PLP 952 (SCMR)
TILLA GUL and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus DEPUTY COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE & LAND CUSTOMS,
| Citation | 1990 PLP 952 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | ‑‑‑‑S.220 as repealed by Customs Act (IV of 1969)‑‑‑Tribal Areas (Application of Acts) Regulation, 1965‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Leave to appeal‑‑‑Question involved was whether Act VIII of 1878 was applicable to Khyber Agency and Torkham Land Customs Station despite its repeal‑‑‑High Court had found that Custom officers in Tribal areas, notwithstanding repeal of Act, would continue to exercise power conferred upon them under said Act in pursuance of Regulation 1965‑‑‑View taken by High Court had been contended on ground that Regulation was of no avail after repeal of Act, 1878‑‑‑Question involved in case being one of law and of considerable general importance, leave to appeal was granted. |
| Bench Members | Nasim Hasan Shah and S. Usman Ali Shah, JJ |
| Parties | TILLA GUL and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus DEPUTY COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE & LAND CUSTOMS, |
| Primary Law | Sea Customs Act (VIII of 1878)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 952 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Sea Customs Act (VIII of 1878)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 952 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the ‑‑‑‑S.220 as repealed by Customs Act (IV of 1969)‑‑‑Tribal Areas (Application of Acts) Regulation, 1965‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Leave to appeal‑‑‑Question involved was whether Act VIII of 1878 was applicable to Khyber Agency and Torkham Land Customs Station despite its repeal‑‑‑High Court had found that Custom officers in Tribal areas, notwithstanding repeal of Act, would continue to exercise power conferred upon them under said Act in pursuance of Regulation 1965‑‑‑View taken by High Court had been contended on ground that Regulation was of no avail after repeal of Act, 1878‑‑‑Question involved in case being one of law and of considerable general importance, leave to appeal was granted. bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah and S. Usman Ali Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 952 (SCMR) (TILLA GUL and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus DEPUTY COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE & LAND CUSTOMS,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zaheer Ahmad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners (in both Petitions).
- Nemo for Respondents (in both Petitions).
- Date of hearing: 13th January, 1990.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgments dated 6‑6‑1989 and 27‑6‑1989 of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar in W.P. No. 334/86 and 339 of 1987). ‑‑‑‑S.220 [as repealed by Customs Act (IV of 1969)]‑‑‑Tribal Areas (Application of Acts) Regulation, 1965‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Leave to appeal‑‑‑Question involved was whether Act VIII of 1878 was applicable to Khyber Agency and Torkham Land Customs Station despite its repeal‑‑‑High Court had found that Custom officers in Tribal areas, notwithstanding repeal of Act, would continue to exercise power conferred upon them under said Act in pursuance of Regulation 1965‑‑‑View taken by High Court had been contended on ground that Regulation was of no avail after repeal of Act, 1878‑‑‑Question involved in case being one of law and of considerable general importance, leave to appeal was granted.
Judgment & Decree
Nemo for Respondents (in both Petitions). Date of hearing: 13th January, 1990. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.‑‑‑This order will dispose of the above two petitions as the question of law arising in both of them is the same. The question is whether the Sea Customs Act 1878 was applicable on 10‑8‑1982 to the Khyber Agency and Torkham Land Customs Station despite the repeal of the said Act by the Customs Act, 1969 (Act IV of 1969)? According to the petitioner, after the repeal of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 by the Act of 1969 there was no law authorising the Customs Officers either to seize the goods or to proceed against the petitioners. Hence the order of the Deputy Collector of the Central Excise & Land Customs Peshawar, Collector of Central Excise & Land Customs (Appeals), Northern Zone, Lahore and the revisional order of the Additional Secretary to the Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Finance, were all passed without jurisdiction and were of no legal effect. The High Court has held that the Customs Officers in the Tribal Areas, notwithstanding the repeal of the Sea Customs Act, continued to exercise the power conferred upon them under the said Act in pursuance of the Tribal Areas (Application of Acts) Regulation 1965. This view is contested on the ground that these Regulations were of no avail after the repeal of the Sea Customs Act, 1878. , The question involved is one of law and of considerable general importance. Leave is granted in both these cases. Security in each case shall be furnished in the sum of Rs.10,
000. The appeal shall be made ready on the existing record with liberty to the parties to add further documents if any and put up for hearing before the summer vacations 1990, if possible. H.B.T./T‑62/S Leave granted.