3

Statute Tools

Print Section Share Section Link

Citing Judgments

• 2021 Y L R 2138 NUSRAT JAN---Appellant Versus The STATE through Advocate General, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Muzaffarabad and another---Respondents
• 2017 P Cr NASIR MEHMOOD---Appellant Versus The STATE---Respondent
• P L D 2016 Supreme Court (AJ&K) 36 25. The argument of Raja Muhammad Hanif Khan, Advocate, counsel for the Council, that Act, 2000 is occupying the field for the last more than 15 years and the appointments of Chief Election Commissioner are being made in the light of said Act and the Azad Government has surrendered its authority before the Council in the matter, therefore, it is estopped to turnaround and claim that the Council has no legislative competence in the matter. The Azad Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly passed the Act, 1992 in relation to the terms and conditions of Chief Election Commissioner. The said Act still holds the field. The appointments were made in the light of said Act. In presence of such Act, the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council passed the Act, 2000 on the same subject. In the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, under Article 143, if there are two Acts on the same subject, one passed by the Majlis-e-Shoora and the other by the Provincial Assembly, the Act of Majlis-e-Shoora shall prevail and the Act passed by the Provincial Assembly shall give way but neither is such like provision in Act, 1974, nor the Council has such superior controlling authority like the Majlis-e-Shoora. It does not need any authority that there is no estoppel against law. We have also considered the case titled Justice Rtd. Muhammad Siddique Farooqi v. Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council and others (Writ Petition No.24/2001
• 2014 M L D 484 ABDUL HAMEED---Appellant Versus NISAWAR HAYAT and another---Respondents
• P L D 2012 Supreme Court (AJ&K) 32 SHAHID NADEEM and another---Appellants Versus MUHAMMAD MANSHA and others---Respondents
• 2012 P Cr MUHAMMAD IQBAL---Appellant Versus ABDUL QAYYUM and another---Respondents