Home Maxims & Terms Democratic system meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Democratic system

Democratic system legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

2011 PLD 963 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Supreme Court observed that court is of the considered view that democratic system must prevail in the country and there shall be no extra-constitutional dispensation and the Judges of the superior courts were bound down not to take oath under any other dispensation.

2011 PLC(CS) 1489 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
Sindh High Court Bar Association's

Supreme Court observed that court is of the considered view that democratic system must prevail in the country and there shall be no extra-constitutional dispensation and the Judges of the superior courts were bound down not to take oath under any other dispensation.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Democratic system", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124932549

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Democratic system"

PLD 2024
2023-December-18

P L D 2024 Supreme Court 207

GUL KHAN and others — Petitioners Versus SAEED UR REHMAN and others — Respondents

Court: High Court
PLD 2016
N/A

P L D 2016 Lahore 1

AWAIS YOUNAS — Petitioner Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents

Court: High Court
PLD 2009
N/A

P L D 2009 Supreme Court 789

SINDH HIGH COURT BAR ASSOCIATION through Secretary and another — Petitioners Versus FEDERATION OF PAKSITAN through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Islamabad and others — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
CLC 2000
decided on 16th August, 1999. '

2000 C L C 904

Ms. BENAZIR BHUTTO ‑‑‑Plaintiff Versus NEWS PUBLICATIONS (PVT.) LTD. and 4 others‑‑‑Defendants

Court: Karachi
PLD 2004
Civil Petition No.945‑K of 2003, decided on 10th February, 2004.

P L D 2004 Supreme Court 399

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Election Commission of Pakistan and 3 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus Syed ALI MURAD SHAH and 12 others‑‑‑Respondents/Pro forma Respondents

Court:
PLD 2024
2023-October-30

P L D 2024 Federal Shariat Court 1

Sardar ABDUL QUDOOS, ADVOCATE — Petitioner Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Law and Justice, Islamabad

Court: High Court
PLD 2024
2024-August-8

P L D 2024 Supreme Court 896

IFTIKHAR AHMED CHAUDHRY — Petitioner Versus SAEED AHMED KHAN and others — Respondents

Court: High Court
PLD 1999
Writ Petitions Nos., 4417, 3330, 4753 and 4006 of 1998, decided on 2nd May, 1998.

P L D 1999 Lahore 115

Mian MANZOOR AHMAD WATTOO‑‑‑Petitioner Versus GOVERNOR OF THE PROVINCE OF PUNJAB, LAHORE and another‑‑‑Respondents

Court: ‑‑‑‑Ss. 3(xxvi‑a), 6‑A, 9‑A, 12(2), proviso, 12‑B, 49‑A as added by Punjab Local Government (Amendment) Ordinance (I of 1998)‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts. 2A, 4, 25, 32 & 199‑‑‑Constitutional petition ‑‑‑Vires of Punjab Local Government (Amendment) Ordinance, 1998‑‑‑Petitioners in their Constitutional petitions had challenged validity of certain provisions of Punjab Local Government (Amendment) Ordinance, 1998 which had introduced Punchayat System in rural areas and had provided for nomination of members of Panchayats and Union Councils, instead of elected representatives ‑‑‑Validity‑‑ Nomination was a word unknown in realm of elections which could not be countenanced in present progressive times‑‑‑Fate of people could not be subjected to choice of Deputy Commissioner who would nominate members, as choice of people through election was a norm which had been recognised by all civilized societies‑‑‑Nomination which would be made by Government in power, would negate commands of Art.32 of Constitution of Pakistan (1973), whereby State would encourage Local Government institutions composed of elected representatives of the area‑‑‑Amending Ordinance which had introduced Panchayat System and nomination at grass roots, was retrogressive and against commands of Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑Every citizen having the right to be equally treated as provided under Arts. 4 & 25 of Constitution of Pakistan (1973) urban population could not be treated differently than rural population and urban population could not be placed at higher footing than rural population‑‑‑Right of vote which had been snatched from rural population by promulgation of Amending Ordinance was discriminatory and could not be sustained‑‑‑Contention that Union Council was redundant in rural areas and that by removal thereof rural population had been brought at par with urban population suffered from in‑built fallacy‑‑‑If a Union Council was surplus, legislative measure should have been taken to remove same rather than to keep it with a different composition and that, too, of nominated members which was highly undemocratic‑‑‑Provision of Punjab Local Government (Amendment) Ordinance, 1998, which had introduced Panchayat System and had provided for nomination of members of Panchayats and Union Councils instead of elected representatives were declared to be ultra vires of Constitution of Pakistan (1973) and were struck down.
PLD 2025
2024-February-29

P L D 2025 Sindh 251

Ptrof. Dr. ANEELA ATTA-U-RAHMAN through Attorney — Appellant Versus MASHOOQUE ALI — Respondent

Court: High Court
CLC 2018
2017-April-6

2018 C L C 1202

Sardar SHER BAHADUR and 5 others — Petitioners Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Law, Islamabad and another — Respondents

Court: Peshawar (Abbottabad Bench)