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

Constitutional duty

Constitutional duty legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

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

2013 PLD 1 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
Arts. 243(1), 244 & 245(1)Member of Armed ForcesConstitutional dutyScope

Within the prescribed parameters, a soldier had to remain committed to defending the country against external aggression or threat of war, and subject to law, acting in aid of civil power when called upon to do so under the directions of the Federal Government

Soldier, in the course of the discharge of his duties, was obligated to seeing that the Constitution was upheld, it was not abrogated, and it was not subverted or mutilated

When a member of the Armed Forces did any of the said acts, or any other similar act, he violated his oath and rendered himself liable to action under and in accordance with the Constitution and the law.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Constitutional duty", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124939214

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Constitutional duty"

SCMR 1994
Civil Review Petition No. 145‑L of 1992, decided on 12th October, 1993.

1994 S C M R 279

MUHAMMAD HANIF and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus SULTAN‑‑‑Respondent

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
SCMR 2023
Constitution Petition No.5 of 2023, decided on 4th April, 2023.

2023 S C M R 2165

MOHAMMAD SIBTAIN KHAN and others — Petitioners Versus ELECTION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN through Chief Election Commissioner, Islamabad and others — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
PLD 2021
2021-March-1

P L D 2021 Supreme Court 480

Reference No. 1 of 2020

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
MLD 1992
Writ Petition No.9049 of 1991, decided on 9th October, 1991.

1992 M L D 88

MUHAMMAD ASGHAR‑‑Petitioner Versus DISTRICT MAGISTRATE SIALKOT and others‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
CLC 1982
Writ Petition No. 574 of 1981, decided on 18th November, 1981.

1982 C L C 2367

IJAZ AHMAD PIRACHA‑Petitioner Versus JUDGE, SPECIAL COURT BANKING

Court: Lahore
PLD 2013
2013-February-8

P L D 2013 Sindh 300

ABDUL HAMEED PANHWAR and 2 others — Petitioners Versus ELECTION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN and 4 others — Respondents

Court: High Court
SCMR 1988
Civil Revision Petition No.22‑R/1987; Civil Miscellaneous Petitions Nos.151‑R and 94‑R of 1987, decided on 19th December, 1987,

1988 S C M R 1318

ABDUL HAMID SAQFI‑‑Petitioner Versus SERVICE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTAN and 22 others‑‑Respondents

Court: High Court
SCMR 2025
Civil Petitions Nos. 2915-L, 2916-L and 2917-L of 2015, decided on 24th June, 2025.

2025 S C M R 2078

CHIEF LAND COMMISSIONER, PUNJAB / SENIOR MEMBER BOARD OF REVENUE PUNJAB, LAHORE and others — Petitioners Versus ADMINISTRATOR AUQAF DEPARTMENT, BAHAWALPUR and others — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
PLD 2011
Writ Petition No. 14248 of 2010. decided on 23rd March, 2011

P L D 2011 Lahore 441

MUHAMMAD NAZIM-UD-DIN and others — Petitioners Versus FEDERAL SECRETARY and others — -Respondents

Court: ---Preamble---publication of Holy Quran (Elimination of Printing and Recording Errors) Rules, 1973, R.4---Constitution of Pakistan, Part-II, Chapter 2 Arts. 8 to 28, Arts. 29, 31 & 199---Constitutional petition-Principles of policy-Implementation-Publication of the Holy Quran---Grievance of petitioners was that authorities had not ensured printing of the Holy Quran on the best quality of paper and no arrangements were made for proper disposal of damaged papers of the Holy Quran--Plea raised by authorities was that correct printing of the Holy Quran was only a matter of Principle of Policy as envisaged in Art.31 contained in Part II, Chapter 2 of the Constitution and not enforceable by judicial process---Validity---Principles of Policy set out in Chapter 2 of Part-II of the Constitution were in fact the aspirations of the Constitution makers, which were intended to be considered as guiding principles of policy of the State---According to Art.31 of the Constitution, the State was to endeavour to secure correct and exact printing and publishers of the Holy Quran---Every organ of the State, under Art.29 of the Constitution, was conferred responsibility to act in accordance with Principles of Policy enshrined in Part-II, Chapter 2 of the Constitution---Constitutional obligation and commitment must be honoured to consolidate public confidence and non fulfilment of liabilities and obligations by the Government was violative of fundamental principles of policy guaranteed under the Constitution---Authorities were under a constitutional duty to secure correct and exact printing and publishing of the Holy Quran as provided in Art.31 of the Constitution--Law titled Punjab Holy Quran (Printing and Recording) Act, 2001, was enacted in the recent past and the rules under the same were yet to be made---High Court directed the Provincial Government to consider the proposals of petitioners in the Rule Framing process in the committee constituted by Chief Minister---Petition was disposed of accordingly.
PLC(CS) 2008
Constitutional Petition No.1616 of 2005, decided on 5th April, 2006.

2008 P L C (C

TARIQ HEHMOOD and 17 others Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN, MINISTRY OF TELECOMMUNICATION through Secretary, Islamabad

Court: Karachi High Court