2006 PLP 2763 (YLR)
Mst. MADIHA SULTANA and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2006 PLP 2763 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Syed Shabbar Raza Rizvi, J |
| Parties | Mst. MADIHA SULTANA and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 2763 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 2763 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Syed Shabbar Raza Rizvi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 2763 (YLR) (Mst. MADIHA SULTANA and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Kanzus Saadat Siddique for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 203
Power of High Court to supervise and control subordinate Courts
Scope
Article 203 of the Constitution was meant to give administrative control to High Court of each Province to supervise and control all Courts within respective Provinces
Said Article had linked administrative relationship between the High Court and Subordinate Courts within the Province
Article 203 of the Constitution did not confer any right on the litigant parties
Litigant parties could not invoke Article 203 for enforcement of any right among themselves
Article 203 also signified that High Court could take only an administrative action under that Article which did not include an action on judicial side. A. Hameed v. Chief Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner, N.-W.F.P. and another PLD 1979 Pesh. 56; Abdul Rehman v. Chaman Ara PLD 1972 Kar. 164 and M. Yousaf Zaki v. Ch. Zafar Ullah 1982 NLR 504 ref.
Judgment & Decree
SYED SHABBAR RAZA RIZVI, J.
The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 203 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan on judicial side. The grievance of the petitioner is against respondents Nos.2 and 3, who are Civil Judge/Family Judge, Chiniot and Incharge Record Keeper, Tehsil Chiniot, District Jhang. Several allegations are levelled against the respondents in the instant petition i.e. causing disappearance of case file titled Madiha Sultana and another v. Muhammad Sharif.
2. Article 203 of the Constitution reads as under:-- "Article 203.
High Court to Superintend Subordinate Courts: Each High Court shall supervise and control Courts subordinate to it. " The language of Article 203 evidently conveys that this Article is meant to give administrative control to High Court of each Province to supervise and control all Courts within the respective Provinces. This Article links administrative relationship between the High Court and subordinate Courts within the Province. This Article does not confer upon any right to the litigant parties. The litigant parties cannot invoke this Article for enforcement of any right amongst themselves. Similarly, this Article also signifies that High Court can take only an administrative action under this Article which does not include an action on judicial side.
3. According to Peshawar High Court, Article 203 merely confers on the High Court the power of supervision and control over its subordinate Courts. This power has nothing to do with the grievance of parties or with doing justice to them. The High Court is required to keep an eye on the working of the subordinate Courts so that they may not fail to do their duties i.e. to attend the Courts regularly and hear and decide cases which fall within their jurisdiction, etc. A. Hameed v. Chief Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner, N.-W.F.P. and another PLD 1979 Peshawar
56. Another judgment of a Full Bench of Sindh High Court may also be mentioned which is reported as Abdul Rehman v. Chaman Ara PLD 1972 Karachi
164. In another case, this Court held that no interference is possible on the judicial side in any matter under Article 203 of the Constitution M. Yousaf Zaki v. Ch. Zafar Ullah 1982 NLR
504. In a recent judgment of this Court, Syed Zahid Hussain J. found as under:-- "The possible source for the issuance of such a direction by the Member Inspection Team of the Court is Article 203 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan." His Lordship further observed that:-- "Control is comprehensive enough to include the general superintendence of the working and the administrative control over the members of the subordinate judiciary. Such a control and supervision should be aimed at to advance the judicial independence and by no means impede or frustrate the very object and purposes." (Sazia Sultana v. Razia Begum PLD 2003 Lahore 23 )."
4. The survey of the above judgments show that if the petitioner has any grievance, he could have approached on the administrative side, invoking Article 203 of the Constitution, to the Member Inspection Team or the Honourable Chief Justice of this Court. However, considering the inconvenience and hardship of the petitioner, the office is directed to transmit this petition, to the Member Inspection Team of this Court at the Principal Seat to take appropriate measures, along with copy of this order.
5. In the above terms, this petition under Article 203 of the Constitution is disposed of. H.B.T./M-416/L????????? ???????????????? Order accordingly.