Provincial autonomy

2024 MLD 1892 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN Judicial Precedent

Arts.25, 27 & 199Educational InstitutionPolicy decisionJudicial reviewScopeChange of evaluation/eligibility criteria for foreign scholarship of Law GraduatesProvincial autonomyScopeDoctrine of estoppel, applicability of

Petitioner participated in the test conducted by Higher Education Commission (HEC) and when he could not achieve the desired result, he turned around and challenged the same on the grounds that the eligibility criteria was vague in nature and discriminatory

Doctrine of estoppel by conduct of the petitioner was fully applicable, therefore, after participating in the entry test conducted by HEC, he could not challenge the same on the ground of discrimination

Each Province is empowered to make its own decision regarding the subjects that fall within their respective domain in accordance with its own circumstances

Decision by one Province regarding any matter cannot be cited as grounds for discrimination if another Province does not make the same decision

Courts should generally refrain from interfering in policy decisions taken by statutory bodies and authorities tasked with running the affairs of educational institutions and students, like the HEC as it needstechnical and professional expertise

Courts are neither equipped with such expertise nor possess the relevant experience to interfere in such matters

In the absence of un-rebuttable material on record regarding mala fide, the Court should not conduct judicial review of an administrative order/action or intervene with the said order of executive authority which otherwise was free from any illegality or jurisdictional clause

Constitutional petition was dismissed accordingly.

2024 CLC 744 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Ss. 3 & 31[Constitution (Eighteenth Amendment) Act (X of 2010)]National Electric Power Regulatory AuthorityObject, purpose and scopeProvincial autonomy

Under 18th Amendment of the Constitution, the Provinces have been given authority in the field of Electricity Generation to adopt different modes and maintain their independence at different levels

Such platform is the NEPRA constituted in S. 3 of Regulation of Generation, Transmission and Distribution of Electric Power Act, 1997, under which each province has to nominate one member to make it fully functional

Purpose is to provide opportunity to the federating units to sit and discuss on the issue and to evolve a policy with a participatory approval if not on consensus

Such unity in decision not only increases confidence of citizens of the country living in their respective provinces but also strengthens the Federation to determine and collect tariff with power and confidence

There is necessity of full strength of NEPRA

In determination, modification or revisions of rates, charges and other terms and conditions for the provision of electric power services, the Authority is guided by National Electricity Policy, the National Electricity Plan and such guidelines as may be issued by Federal Government in order to give effect to National Electricity Policy and National Electric Plan.

2021 PLD 544 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Art. 1"Federalism"Provincial autonomyScope

Constitution has placed a number of constraints on Federal Government and Parliament lest they may not trample upon provincial autonomy and disregard principle of federalism on which Constitutional structure stands.

2017 PLD 347 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Art. 270AA(8)(9) [as amended by Constitution (Eighteenth Amendment) Act (X of 2010)] & Fourth Schedule, Part-I, Entry 16

Devolution of power

Provincial autonomy

Medical and Research Institutions established by Federal Government were taken over by Provincial Government after amendment in Art.270AA of the Constitution under, Constitution (Eighteenth Amendment) Act, 2010

Validity

Devolution contemplated by Art.270AA (8) and (9) of the Constitution, had no relevance for any of said institutions

Implementation Commission purported to recommend their transfer to Province and the Commission went well beyond its remit, authority and jurisdiction

Implementation Commission erred materially and on the constitutional plane, in making recommendation and Federal Cabinet and Government erred equally in accepting and acting upon the same

All actions taken in that regard were legally invalid and without lawful effect

Implementation Commission could only act in terms of Art.270AA (8) and (9) of the Constitution and devolution did not at all apply to any of the institutions in question

Purported transfer of institutions failed on constitutional plane and was unlawful

Medical Institutions were Federal Institutions within the scope of Entry No. 16 in Part-I, of Fourth Schedule to the Constitution

Institutions in question were in the exclusive Federal domain and remained so notwithstanding the effect of Eighteenth Amendment of the Constitution

Constitutional petition was allowed in circumstances.

2012 PLD 649 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Arts. 175 & 203Provincial autonomyScopeEach federating unit is free to carve out its own policy and practice in such mattersParity between the federating units is not required and would be contrary to federal nature of the Constitution

Only requirement is that policy and practice adopted by each province must conform to constitutional imperatives elaborated in Arts.175 and 203 of the Constitution and relevant precedents.