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

Duties

Duties legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

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

2026 PLC 1 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
S.3State owned enterprisesTerms and conditions of employeesBoard of directorsDuties

Provision of State-Owned Enterprises (Governance and Operations) Act, 2023 has been enforced for the smooth working of state-owned companies with specific reference to appointment of its Chief Executive and the Directors of the Board

Not a single reference has been made anywhere in State-Owned Enterprises (Governance and Operations) Act, 2023 to terms and conditions of employees of state-owned companies

Provision of State-Owned Enterprises (Governance and Operations) Act, 2023, cannot unnecessarily be stretched to that extent at the whims of any state-owned company.

2020 PCrLJ 683 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
Vol. III, Ch. XXV, R. 25.2(3)Investigating officerDuties

Focus of investigating officer is to only successfully establish a case against a person nominated as accused in the case

In such desire and exuberance of investigating officer, material which is collected by him during investigation of the case and which material would establish innocence of accused or at very least help to his defense, is discarded from consideration.

2016 PTD 2924 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTAN Judicial Precedent
S. 131Appeal to Appellate TribunalBench and BarDutiesAppellate Tribunal Inland Revenue was final fact finding authorityDepartment, Members of Bar and Bench were trustees and onus was on them to preserve its dignity, sanctity and purityRole of Departmental Representatives was no less than that of Bar and Bench

Duty of Departmental Representative was very noble and sacred one and they were entrusted with a duty to be performed in court

Departmental Representatives were only agents or trustees of department in one sense but also an Officer of the court; they had three fold duties; one towards department/FBR/Government another towards the court and third towards the opposing counsel.

2012 PLD 681 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
Art. 218Election CommissionDutiesElection processSignificance and scopeElection process was one of the key aspects of democracy and was identified and regulated by the Constitution

Article 218 of the Constitution, constituted the Election Commission and empowered it to organize and oversee the election process and to ensure, inter alia, that it was conducted honestly, justly, fairly and in accordance with law and that corrupt practices were guarded against.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Duties", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124938109

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Duties"

SCMR 2018
Civil Petitions Nos. 1812-L to 1815-L, 1962-L to 1970-L, 1981-L to 1983-L of 2017, decided on 22nd September, 2017.

2018 S C M R 1

Messrs ADVANCE TELECOM and others — Petitioners Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
PTD 2016
Civil Appeal No. 1600 of 2006, decided on 4th January, 2016.

2016 P T D 2355

INDUS TRADING AND CONTRACTING COMPANY Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE), KARACHI and others —

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
SCMR 2016
Civil Appeal No. 1600 of 2006, decided on 4th January, 2016.

2016 S C M R 842

INDUS TRADING AND CONTRACTING COMPANY — Appellant Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE) KARACHI and others — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
PLD 2004
N/A

P L D 2004 Lahore 351

Messrs METROPOLE CINEMA PVT. LTD. through Managing Director and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB through Secretary, Excise and Taxation Department, Lahore and 4 others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: High Court
CLC 1992
Writ Petition No.309 of 1990, decided on 8th October, 1991.

1992 C L C 159

MONNOO INDUSTRIES LIMITED‑‑‑Petitioner Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Finance, Islamabad and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
PTD 2003
Writ Petitions Nos. 1144 and 1526 of 1997, decided on 25th May, 2002.

2003 P T D 1002

Messrs LUCKY CEMENT LIMITED Versus C.B.R. and others

Court: Peshawar High Court
PLD 2004
2003-September-30

P L D 2004 Lahore 73

PARKS PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD. — Petitioner Versus D.G. EXCISE AND TAXATION — Respondent

Court: High Court
PLD 1989
Writ Petition No.568 of 1988, decided on 6th March, 1989.

P L D 1989 Lahore 237

PUNJAB STEEL LIMITED‑‑Petitioner Versus DEPUTY COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS,

Court:
PLD 1993
Constitutional Petition No.D‑173 Of 1990, decided on 23rd December, 1992.

P L D 1993 Karachi 87

SALFI TEXTILE MILLS LTD., KARACHI‑‑ Petitioner Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (APPRAISEMENT),

Court:
PLD 1977
Constitutional Petition No. 1178 of 1975, heard on 19th April 1977.

Before P L D 1977 Karachi 911

MESSRS YOUSUF RE‑ROLLING MILLS, KARACHI‑Petitioner Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, KARACHI AND ANOTHER- Respondents

Court: S. 18(2)‑Interpretation of statutes‑Provisions contained in any statute bearing on same subject‑matter‑To he so interpreted as to yield a harmonious result, avoiding conflict and contradiction. Interpretation of statutes.