SCMR 1997

1997 SCMR 186 (PLP)

and 2 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus NASEER AHMAD KHAN and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 1402‑L of 1996, decided on 5th June, 1996.
Honorable Judges
Saad Saood Jan, Muhammad Ilyas
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1997 SCMR 186 (PLP)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Saad Saood Jan, Muhammad Ilyas
Parties and 2 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus NASEER AHMAD KHAN and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents
Primary Law Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997 SCMR 186 (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1997 SCMR 186 (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Saad Saood Jan, Muhammad Ilyas.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1997 SCMR 186 (PLP) (and 2 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus NASEER AHMAD KHAN and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑

Representation

  • Raja Muhammad Anwar, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Ilyas Khan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ch. M.Z. Khalil, Advocate on Record for Petitioners.
  • Munir Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court, with S.Abul Aasim Jafri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents.
  • Date of hearing: 5th June, 1996.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment dated 26‑2‑1996 of the Lahore High Court passed in W.P. No.2439/1989). ‑‑‑‑Arts. 129, 139 and 185(3)‑‑‑Supersession of Cooperative Society by Martial Law Administrator with option to Government to revive the same at any time‑‑ Government decided to revive such Society from 1st August, 1986 but requisite steps were not taken to implement decision relating to revival of Society‑‑ Government during pendency of Constitutional petition rescinded earlier decision in regard to revival of said Society‑‑‑Such additional ground was also taken in Constitutional petition‑‑‑High Court directed Government to revive the Society within specified period‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Main grounds raised in petition for leave to appeal were that no order or notification was issued under signature of any functionary of Government, on basis of decision of cabinet for revival of said Society‑‑‑Question for determination would be whether decision of Cabinet for revival of Society was synonymous with decision of Government keeping in view provisions of Arts. 129 & 139 of the Constitution‑‑‑Question raised involved interpretation of the Constitution‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted inter alia to examine whether decision of Cabinet could be treated as decision of Government within meaning of para.3 of Martial Law Order No.856, whereby Model Town Cooperative Society was dissolved.

Judgment & Decree

"Report on the Model Town Cooperative Society (1962) Ltd. Case No. CAB‑II‑1‑12/85(6). The said decision is reproduced below:‑ "The Cabinet was briefed about the background of the case under discussion. It was stated that the Governor/M.L.A. was pleased to supersede the Model Town Cooperative Society vide MLO No.856 dated 30‑3‑1982 and appoint the Deputy Commissioner, Lahore as its Administrator. After taking over the charge of this Society, the Administrator prepared a working paper, pin‑pointing the problems being faced by it. The working paper was considered in a meeting held under the Chairmanship of the Chief Secretary and a number of decisions were taken. A committee was set up under the Chairmanship of the Secretary, Local Government and Rural Development to examine whether the area falling within the jurisdiction of Model Town should continue as an segregated unit or it should be merged with the rest of the city of Lahore. Its report was placed before the Cabinet on 5‑6‑1983. The Cabinet decided that the other concerned departments should also be consulted. In pursuance of this decision of the Cabinet, a number of meetings were held and now the Committee has suggested that the Model Town Cooperative Society may be allowed to maintain its separate entity and should not be merged in Lahore Municipal Corporation in view of its long standing and sound financial position. It should govern its own affairs through representatives, elected through the proposed new system. The Cabinet was briefed about the causes of the failure of the previous management of the Society, and safeguards which should be provided for the smooth functioning of the Society in future, including its administrative set‑up. It was stated that the Society suffered mostly because of loose control, mismanagement, misuse of power and funds, for the rectification of which several proposals were submitted. It was also suggested that the present arrangement in which Commissioner is the Administrator of the Society be continued for another one year to ensure continuity of development works, and the Society be restored on 1st of July, 1986.

2. The Cabinet discussed the pros and cons of the restoration of the Model Town Cooperative Society and observed that in the proposed amendments, President of the Society has got too meagre powers, which should be enhanced. It was also suggested that the Secretary of the reformed Society should be a departmental person, an official from the Cooperative Department. Law Department was of the view that the legal aspects of the case have not been fully examined to which it was stated that it, is only the approval in principle that is being sought from the Cabinet. Before presenting the Rules/Bye‑Laws in the next Cabinet meeting in its final shape, the draft would be vetted by the Law Department. "(1) In principle, it was agreed that the area falling within the jurisdiction of Model Town should continue as a segregated unit under the administration of the Model Town Cooperative Society. (2) Cooperative Department would submit a detailed report regarding the proposed amendments in the structure, functions, management and constitution of the Model Town Cooperative Society, in a draft form, after vetting it from the Law Department and in consultation with the Local Government Department. (3) Powers of the President of the Society, would be increased and Secretary of the Society will be from the Cooperative Department. (4) Society will be revived on 1‑7‑1986."

5. No order or notification was issued, under the signatures of any functionary of the Government of the Punjab, on the basis of the above decision produced before us. This gave rise to the question whether the decision of the Cabinet was synonymous with the decision of the Government keeping in view the provisions of Articles 129 and 139 of the Constitution which read as follows:‑‑ "

129. Exercise of executive authority of the Province.‑‑The executive authority of the Province shall vest in the Governor and shall be exercised by him, either directly or through officers subordinate to him, in accordance with the Constitution.

139. Conduct of business of Provincial Government.‑‑(1) All executive actions of the Provincial Government shall be expressed to be taken in the name of the Governor. (2) The Governor shall by rules specify the manner in which orders and other instruments made and executed in his name shall be authenticated, and the validity of any order or instrument so authenticated shall not be questioned in any Court on the ground that it was not made or executed by the Governor. (3) The Governor shall also make rules for the allocation and transaction of the business of the Provincial Government. "

6. Since the above question involves interpretation of the Constitutional provisions, leave is granted to inter alia, examine whether the aforementioned decision of the Cabinet can be treated as a decision of the Government within the meanings of paragraph 3 of the Martial Law Order whereby the Model Town Cooperative Society was dissolved.

7. Status quo shall be maintained during the pendency of the instant petition, which now stand converted into an appeal.

8. In view of the nature of the matter, the appeal will be fixed for an early date. A.A./R‑287/S Leave granted