2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
GHULAM HUSSAIN Versus UNION COUNCIL KHOKHRAPAR through Secretary Union Council and another
| Citation | 2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Nazim Hussain Siddiqui, C.J., Abdul Hameed Dogar and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ |
| Parties | GHULAM HUSSAIN Versus UNION COUNCIL KHOKHRAPAR through Secretary Union Council and another |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Nazim Hussain Siddiqui, C.J., Abdul Hameed Dogar and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (GHULAM HUSSAIN Versus UNION COUNCIL KHOKHRAPAR through Secretary Union Council and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abdul Rahim Kazi, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing; 3rd March, 2004. .
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order dated 11‑2‑2004 of the High Court of Sindh, Circuit Bench, Hyderabad passed in C.P. No.D‑264 of 2003). ‑‑‑Arts. 185(3) & 212(3)‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal to Supreme Court‑‑‑Scope‑‑‑Petition for direction to High Court for early disposal of case‑‑‑Maintainability of such petition‑‑‑Petition was pending before High Court and no order of any sort had been passed so far‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal was maintainable under Art. 185(3) of the Constitution only against any judgment, decree, order or sentence of High Court‑‑‑No substantial question of public importance within the contemplation of Art.212(3) of the Constitution was made out to justify grant of leave‑‑ Petition was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, J.‑‑‑Through this petition, petitioner Ghulam Hussain has invoked the Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Constitution") for grant of leave to appeal on the ground that Constitutional Petition No.D‑264 of 2003 filed by him before High Court of Sindh, Circuit Bench, Hyderabad is not being heard since last five months wherein he has challenged the resolution dated 15‑9‑2003 whereby vote of no confidence was passed against him through secret ballot and in consequence whereof he has been unseated and notification about his removal has been issued by the respondent.
2. Mr. Abdul Rahim Kazi, learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that since the Constitutional petition filed by petitioner challenging his removal by way of vote of no confidence is pending adjudication since 21‑9‑2003 before the High Court and is being adjourned without any justification so much so even interim relief is neither granted nor refused. Thus finding no other alternative, the petitioner has invoked the Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 185(3) of the Constitution.
3. Admittedly, the petition is pending before the High Court and no order of any sort has been passed so far. It is only against any judgment, decree; order or sentence of High Court petition for leave to appeal is maintainable under Article 185(3) of the Constitution. Moreover no substantial question of public importance within the contemplation of clause (3) of Article 212 of the Constitution has been made out to justify grant of leave in this case. As such, the petition is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused. M.H./G‑10/S Petition dismissed.