Development projects

2026 CLD 310 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Art.199Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court, exercise ofDevelopment projectsMatters of technical expertiseDomain of executive authorityPolicy decisionsScope

Courts are not that well equipped to adjudicate the technical matters relating purely to policy decisions specially those of development projects which fall under the domain of executive authority to decide to adjudicate on a policy decision

Courts no doubt have a duty to see that in decision making, no law is violated and fundamental rights guaranteed under the constitution are not transgressed.

2026 PLD 17 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Art.199Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court, exercise ofDevelopment projectsMatters of technical expertiseDomain of executive authorityPolicy decisionsScope

Courts are not that well equipped to adjudicate the technical matters relating purely to policy decisions specially those of development projects which fall under the domain of executive authority to decide to adjudicate on a policy decision

Courts no doubt have a duty to see that in decision making, no law is violated and fundamental rights guaranteed under the constitution are not transgressed.

2013 PLD 167 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Arts. 29 & 38Development projectsPolicy makingFederal and Provincial Governments, domain ofScope

Functions of policy making or determining priorities of various development projects in the country, were the exclusive domain and function of the Federal and Provincial Governments, as the case might be, who had their own ministers, departments, commission and consultants, etc. for policy making and for determining priorities of various projects and their implementation.

2013 PLD 167 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Arts. 29, 38 & 184(3)

Constitutional petition under Art. 184(3) of the Constitution relating to non-provision of funds and inordinate delay in the gasification project of available Thar coal reserves

Development projects

Policy making

Federal and Provincial Governments, domain of

Scope

Interference in policy making by Supreme Court

Scope

Petitioners contended that policies and priorities of the Government with regard to the project in question were neither pragmatic nor bona fide, therefore, Supreme Court should issue necessary directions to expedite the completion of the project, which was likely to play a vital role in the economic development of the country and for the betterment of the poor people

Validity

Policies were to be made by the respective Federal and Provincial Governments and all decisions regarding their implementation were also to be taken by them on the basis of determined priorities of different projects and availability of financial resources at their disposal

Such exercise could not be ordinarily interfered with by the Supreme Court by invoking its jurisdiction under Art.184(3) of the Constitution, unless shown to be mala fide or in violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution to every citizen of the country, thereby affecting the interest of public at large

Concerned officials from Federal and Provincial Government stated in court that funds had been released for the project in question and work was in progress

Supreme Court observed that in view of statement of said officials and material placed on record, it was satisfied that no further action was required to be taken in the present petition, which had served its purpose to a great extent upon release of 50% funds for the project in question and commitment of Federal Government for release of remaining 50% funds within the financial year

Constitutional petition was disposed of accordingly.