SCMR 2000

2000 PLP 1569 (SCMR)

FOUZIA SALEEM ABBAS and 3 others — Petitioners Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Kashmir Affairs, Islamabad and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Criminal Original Petition No. 81 of 1999, decided on 2nd November, 1999.
Honorable Judges
Saiduzzaman Siddiqui, C.J., Irshad Hasan Khan,
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2000 PLP 1569 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Saiduzzaman Siddiqui, C.J., Irshad Hasan Khan,
Parties FOUZIA SALEEM ABBAS and 3 others — Petitioners Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Kashmir Affairs, Islamabad and another — 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 2000 PLP 1569 (SCMR)?

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

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2000 PLP 1569 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Saiduzzaman Siddiqui, C.J., Irshad Hasan Khan,.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2000 PLP 1569 (SCMR) (FOUZIA SALEEM ABBAS and 3 others — Petitioners Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Kashmir Affairs, Islamabad and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)

Representation

  • for Petitioners.
  • Tanvir Bashir Ansari, Deputy Attorney-General for Respondents.
  • "Sh. Muhammad Naeern, Advocate Supreme Court and M. A. Zaidi, Avocate-on-Record
  • We have heard Sh. Muhammad-Naeem, Advocate Supreme Court, for the petitioners and Mr. Tanvir Bashir Ansari, the learned Deputy Attorney-General for the Federation.

Headnotes / Summary

(Contempt Petition Supreme Court Rules, 1980 regarding judgment dated 28-5-1999 passed by this Court in Constitution Petitions Nos. 11and 17 of 1994).

Art. 204

Contempt of Court

Holding of election in Northern Areas-- Allegation was that notification issued by the Federal Government was against the spirit of the judgment of Supreme Court and in violation of its order

Documents produced alongwith parawise comments filed on behalf of Federal Government showed that in issuing Notification for holding elections in the Northern Areas the directions given by Supreme Court in its judgment had been substantially complied with

No case for drawing up contempt proceedings against the respondents was, therefore, made out

Petition was dismissed accordingly. "Sh. Muhammad Naeern, Advocate Supreme Court and M. A. Zaidi, Avocate-on-Record Date hearing; 2nd November, 1999.

Judgment & Decree

SAIDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, C.J.

The above Criminal Original Petition is filed by the petitioners with the following prayer:

"It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the contempt proceedings be initiated against the respondents since the Notification No. 14/11/99-CS is against the spirit of judgment of Supreme Court dated 12-5-1999 and in violation of the order of Supreme Court. Hence the Elections declared by respondents to be held on November 3rd and 5th are against the judgment of Supreme Court the same be postponed and respondents be directed to declare the Administrative/Judicial set-up in accordance with the judgment of Supreme Court. Northern Areas is considered to be fifth zone of the country, therefore, the order of Chief Executive is applicable in letter and spirit. No elections can be held unless the accountability process is completed within the coming (sic) the election are also against P.C.O No. l of 1999 of Chief Executive." We have heard Sh. Muhammad-Naeem, Advocate Supreme Court, for the petitioners and Mr. Tanvir Bashir Ansari, the learned Deputy Attorney-General for the Federation. The main grievance of the petitioners appears to be that the elections announced for 3rd and 5th of this month in the Northern Areas be ordered to be postponed as the same are against the spirit of the judgment of this Court dated 28-5-1999. The learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that establishment of the administrative and judicial set-up in the Northern Areas was a condition precedent for holding of the elections there under the above orders of this Court. It is also contended by the learned counsel that the elections in the Northern Areas are being held on the 3rd and 5th of this month without the permission and orders of the Chief Executive of Pakistan. In the parawise comments filed on behalf of Federation of Pakistan, various allegations made by the petitioners in their contempt application, are denied and it is asserted that the judgment of this Court dated 28-5-1999 has been complied with by the authorities to letter and spirit and elections in Northern Areas are being held under the orders of Chief Executive after complying with the conditions precedent. This Court while deciding Constitution Petitions Nos. ll and 17 of 1994 made the following observations in paragraphs 26 and 2 % of the judgment:

"26, It may be observed that since the geographical location of the Northern Areas is very sensitive because it is bordering India. China, Tibet and USSR, and as the above areas in the past have also been treated differently, this Court cannot decide what type of Government should be provided to ensure the compliance with the above mandate of 'the Constitution. Nor we can direct that the people of Northern Areas should be given representation in the Parliament as, at this stage, it may not be in the larger interest of the country because of the fact that a plebiscite under the auspices of the United Nations is to be held. The above questions are to be decided by the Parliament and the Executive. This Court at the most can direct that the proper administrative and legislative steps should be taken to ensure that the people of Northern Areas enjoy their above rights under the Constitution

27. As regard the right to access to justice through an independent judiciary, it may be observed that the Northern Areas has a Chief Court, which can be equated with a High Court provided it is manned by the persons of the stature who are fit to be elevated as Judges to any High Court in Pakistan. Its jurisdiction is to be enlarged as to include jurisdiction to entertain Constitutional petitions inter alia to enforce the Fundamental Rights enshrined in the Constitution and to provide right to approach a higher forum through a petition for leave to appeal and/or by way of an appeal against orders/judgments of the above Chief Court. The same may require amendments in the aforesaid Notification No.II-2/17/94 dated 17-11-1994 referred to hereinabove in para. 23, and/or the Constitution/statute/statutes/order/orders/rules/notification/notifications." After examining the scope of reliefs which could be granted to the people of Northern Areas, this Court issued the following directions to the Federal Government:-- "

28. We, therefore, allow the above petitions and direct the respondent Federation as under: to initiate appropriate administrative/legislative measures within a period of six, months from today to make necessary amendments in the Constitution/relevant statute/statutes order/orders/rules/ notificationlnotifications, to ensure that the people of Northern Areas enjoy their above fundamental rights, namely, to be governed through their, chosen representatives and to have access to justice through an independent judiciary inter alia for enforcement of their Fundamental Rights guaranteed under the Constitution." The learned Deputy Attorney-General has filed, alongwith parawise comments, copies of the order issued by the Chief Executive's Secretariat, Islamabad. on 30-10-1999, Notifications dated 28th October, 1999, issued by Government of Pakistan, Kashmir Affairs, Northern Areas and States and Frontier Regions Division, promulgating Northern Areas Council Legal Framework (Amendment) Order, 1999, Northern Areas Rules of Business (Amendment), 1999 and Northern Areas Court of Appeals (Establishment) Order, 1999. The above mentioned documents produced by the learned Deputy Attorney-General alongwith parawise pomments filed on behalf of Federal A Government, do show that the directions given by this Court in its judgment dated 28-5-1999 have been substantially complied with. No case for drawing up contempt proceedings against the respondents is made out The petition is accordingly, dismissed. Petition dismissed.