GBLR 2010

2010 PLP 340 (GBLR)

MUHAMMAD AMIN BALGHARI — Petitioner Versus PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT and others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Appellate Court
Decided Date
2010-May-4
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, C.J. and Muhammad Yaqoob, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2010 PLP 340 (GBLR)
Forum / Court Supreme Appellate Court
Bench Members Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, C.J. and Muhammad Yaqoob, J
Parties MUHAMMAD AMIN BALGHARI — Petitioner Versus PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT and others — Respondents
Primary Law Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self-Governance) Order, 2009
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP 340 (GBLR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self-Governance) Order, 2009 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 PLP 340 (GBLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Appellate Court bench comprising: Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, C.J. and Muhammad Yaqoob, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 PLP 340 (GBLR) (MUHAMMAD AMIN BALGHARI — Petitioner Versus PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self-Governance) Order, 2009

Representation

  • Muhammad Issa, Senior Advocate assisted by Jamal Khan Advocate for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

Art. 60(13)

Petition for leave to appeal

Scope

No jurisdictional error or legal defect was in the order of Chief Court or the Departmental orders regarding recall of tenders

Supreme Appellate Court was not supposed to interfere in the matter in which there was no material illegality in the order of Chief Court or the action taken by the administrative authorities in good faith in public interest.

Judgment & Decree

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner at length and having gone through the record we have not been able to find out any jurisdictional error or legal defect in the order of Chief Court or in the departmental orders regarding recall of tenders. This Court is not supposed to interfere in the matter in which there is no material illegality in the order of Chief Court on the action taken by the administrative authorities in good faith in public interest. This petition is accordingly dismissed. H.B.T./93/Glt. Petition dismissed.