1988 PLP 1673 (SCMR)
HAFIZ AHMAD — Petitioner Versus WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
| Citation | 1988 PLP 1673 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Ghulam Mujaddid Mirza and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | HAFIZ AHMAD — Petitioner Versus WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 1673 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP 1673 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Ghulam Mujaddid Mirza and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP 1673 (SCMR) (HAFIZ AHMAD — Petitioner Versus WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 3rd July, 1988.
- Muhammad Akram Khokhar, Advocate Supreme Court of Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the order of the Lahore High Court, dated 25-4-1981 in Writ Petition No.6465/S/1980).
Arts.185(3) & 199--Dismissal of writ petition by High Court challenged--Question of payment of arrears--Order of High Court being in accordance with law, upheld--Leave to appeal refused. Muhammad Akram Khokhar, Advocate Supreme Court of Petitioner.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑Arts.185(3) R 199‑‑Dismissal of writ petition by High Court challenged‑‑Question of payment of arrears‑‑Order of High Court being in accordance with law, upheld‑‑Leave to appeal refused. Muhammad Akram Khokhar, Advocate Supreme Court of Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 3rd July, 1988. GHULAM MUJADDID MIRZA, J.‑‑Hafiz Ahmad son of Abdul Hakim. Sidhu Jat, resident of 7‑Civil Lines, Malik Anwar Road Sheikhupura, by means of this petition for special leave to appeal has impugned the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 25‑4‑1981 in Writ Petition No.645/S/80 and order dated 2‑5‑1981 in C.M No.1262/81. Before discussing the contention we would like to observe that the Constitution petition filed by Hafiz Ahmad against the respondents was finally disposed of by order dated 25‑4‑1981. It so appears that thereafter a miscellaneous application was moved by the petitioner. That was also dismissed by the learned Judge of the High Court observing thereby "that the main petition has already been disposed of". So, the only question to be examined in this petition is whether there is any justification to grant leave against the order of the High Court dated 25‑4‑1981. Learned counsel appearing in support of this petition all along argued for the payment of arrears to the petitioner but he was unable to convince us that the order of the High Court was not in accordance with law. We agree with the view taken by the learned Judge. Leave is declined. M.I./H‑43/8 Petition dismissed.