2006 PLP 875 (SCMR)
IBRAHIM & SONS — Petitioner Versus PUNJAB TEXTBOOK BOARD and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2006 PLP 875 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Tanvir Ahmed Khan and Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday, JJ |
| Parties | IBRAHIM & SONS — Petitioner Versus PUNJAB TEXTBOOK BOARD and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Textbook Board Ordinance (XLI of 1962) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 875 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Textbook Board Ordinance (XLI of 1962) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 875 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Tanvir Ahmed Khan and Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 875 (SCMR) (IBRAHIM & SONS — Petitioner Versus PUNJAB TEXTBOOK BOARD and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Atta Ullah, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 5th March, 2003.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order dated 11-2-2000 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Writ Petition No.2170 of 2000).
S. 26
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts.185(3)
Imposition of penalty on publisher by Board while looking after work of Director (Technical) as stop-gap arrangement with order of the Board
Constitution petition filed by publisher was dismissed by High Court
According to S.26 of West Pakistan Textbook Board Ordinance, 1962, no act or proceeding of Board or Advisory Council would be invalidated merely for existence of a vacancy in Board or Advisory Council or any irregularity in appointment of any member of Board or Advisory Council
No illegality or legal infirmity having been found in impugned judgment, Supreme Court dismissed petition and refused to leave to appeal.
Judgment & Decree
TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.
Leave to appeal is sought against the order, dated 11-2-2000. of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, whereby Writ Petition No.2170 of 2000 filed by the petitioner was dismissed in limine. The facts briefly narrated are that Professor Shabbir Ahmed, Director (Technical) of the Punjab Text Book Board, hereinafter referred to as the Board, retired with effect from 4-6-1999. The Board in the circumstances passed an order that respondent No.3 will look after the work of Director (Technical) in addition to his own work till the appointment of the new incumbent. Subsequent thereto, respondent No.3 imposed a penalty of Rs.11,500 upon the petitioner who is stated to be a Publisher with the Board. This order of imposition of penalty was assailed by the petitioner before the Lahore High Court, Lahore, through the above writ petition, which has been dismissed in limine through the order, dated 11-2-2000, impugned herein. Hence, this petition for leave to appeal. We have considered the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the documents appended with this petition. Section 26 of the West Pakistan Textbook Board Ordinance, 1962, is a complete answer to the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner which mandated that no act or proceeding of the Board or the Advisory Council shall be invalidated merely by reason of the existence of a vacancy on the Board or the Advisory Council, or by reason of any irregularity in the appointment of any member of the Board or the Advisory Council. Apart from this if the contention of the learned counsel is accepted, it would totally frustrate the resolution of the Board which authorized respondent No.3 to look after the work of Director (Technical) as a stop-gap arrangement. Learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out any illegality or legal infirmity in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. Resultantly, for what has been stated above, the instant petition being without any merit is hereby dismissed and leave refused. S.A.K./I-80/SC?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Leave refused.