2004 PLP 619 (SCMR)
NISAR AHMED and others — Petitioners Versus NAVEED UD DIN and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2004 PLP 619 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Sh. Riaz Ahmad, C.J. and Syed Deedar Hussain Shah, J |
| Parties | NISAR AHMED and others — Petitioners Versus NAVEED UD DIN and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP 619 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP 619 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Sh. Riaz Ahmad, C.J. and Syed Deedar Hussain Shah, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP 619 (SCMR) (NISAR AHMED and others — Petitioners Versus NAVEED UD DIN and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abdul Mujeeb Peerzada, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Akhlaq Ahmed Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Dr. Qazi Khalid Ali, Additional Advocate-General Sindh for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 6th October, 2003.
- 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Advocate-General Sindh and have also gone through the contents of the impugned order. Admittedly, the order sought to be reviewed had been passed by the learned Division Bench of the High Court, and therefore, in all propriety, the review arising therefrom ought to have been placed before the same Division Bench and the learned Single Judge should not have proceeded to hear and dispose of the same. It is pertinent to mention that learned Judges of the Division Bench were available, and it appears that the office of the High Court of Sindh did not bring the facts into the notice of the Worthy Chief Justice before the constitution of the Bench. In this view of the matter, we convert this petition into appeal and allow the same with the consequence and the order impugned is set aside, the case is remanded to the High Court or Sindh for the constitution of Bench for disposal of the review application in accordance with law, preferably by the learned Judges who had heard the main case earlier.
Headnotes / Summary
Arts. 183(3) & 199
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XLVII, R.5
Judgment of Division Bench reviewed by Single Bench of High Court
Review arising of judgment passed by Division Bench ought to have been placed before same Division Bench, which was available and Single Bench should not have decided same
Office of High Court had not brought such facts to the notice of Chief Justice before constituting the Bench
Supreme Court accepted appeal, set aside impugned order and remanded case to High Court for disposal of review application preferably by Judges, who had heard the main case earlier.
Judgment & Decree
SH. RIAZ AHMAD, C.J.
Leave to appeal is sought against an order dated 4th of July, 2003 by means of which the learned Judge of the High Court of Sindh (Bench at Sukkur) accepted the review application and by recalling the order dated 2-10-2001 set aside the remissions granted to petitioners by the Jail Authorities as well as the Provincial Government and directed that petitioners be taken into custody and remanded to jail for serving out the remaining portion of their respective sentences.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Advocate-General Sindh and have also gone through the contents of the impugned order. Admittedly, the order sought to be reviewed had been passed by the learned Division Bench of the High Court, and therefore, in all propriety, the review arising therefrom ought to have been placed before the same Division Bench and the learned Single Judge should not have proceeded to hear and dispose of the same. It is pertinent to mention that learned Judges of the Division Bench were available, and it appears that the office of the High Court of Sindh did not bring the facts into the notice of the Worthy Chief Justice before the constitution of the Bench. In this view of the matter, we convert this petition into appeal and allow the same with the consequence and the order impugned is set aside, the case is remanded to the High Court or Sindh for the constitution of Bench for disposal of the review application in accordance with law, preferably by the learned Judges who had heard the main case earlier. Petition converted into appeal. Case remanded to the High Court of Sindh. S.A.K./N-184/S Case remanded