Alternate efficacious remedy

2025 PLD 151 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Art. 199Constitutional petitionMaintainabilityAlternate efficacious remedyGrievance of a securities broking company against Pakistan Stock ExchangeArbitration proceedingsPetitioner assailed initiation of arbitral proceedings before arbitral tribunal by respondent/ Pakistan Stock ExchangeValidityWhen alternative and equally efficacious remedy is open to a litigant, he should pursue that remedy

In presence of arbitration agreement between parties there was no other option left but for the aggrieved party to proceed with agreed alternative dispute resolution mechanism i.e. arbitration

There was no reason to invoke Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court for issuance of writ in an ongoing arbitration matter unless some exceptional ground could be made out for such intervention in the facts and circumstances of the case or in law

Respondent/Pakistan Stock Exchange was not a person performing functions in connection with the affairs of the Federation

Institutional arbitration was currently under process between parties

Petitioner could not renege from the same and even otherwise, arbitral forum had provided adequate remedy to petitioner, which had not been exhausted

High Court declined to interfere in the matter as an arbitration was underway

Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

2024 PLC 46 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN Judicial Precedent

Ss. 31 & 58Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.VII, R.11Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199Constitutional petitionAlternate efficacious remedyWorkers Association, internal affairs of

Petitioner assailed notification of election schedule before National Industrial Relations Commission which petition was rejected

Plea raised by petitioner was that alternate remedy under relevant law was lengthy, therefore, Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court was invoked for early disposal of the matter

Validity

When statute provided alternate remedy by way of appeal / revision, Constitutional petition was not maintainable

High Court declined plea of petitioner as it was not choice of any party to invoke Constitutional jurisdiction as an alternate remedy

Petitioner had remedy to file appeal against the order passed by National Industrial Relations Commission

Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

2021 MLD 1491 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Art.199Constitutional petitionAlternate efficacious remedyScope

In presence of any other efficacious remedy, discretionary relief under Constitutional jurisdiction is not available to any aggrieved person

Whenever an alternative statutory mechanism exists to redress grievance of an aggrieved party, High Court is reluctant to grant any relief under Art.199 of the Constitution.

2016 PLD 318 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Rr. 61 to 65Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199Constitutional petitionMaintainabilityAlternate efficacious remedy

Election dispute can only be agitated at relevant point of time in terms of Rr.61, 62, 63, 64 & 65 of Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Rules, 1976, before Election Tribunal, instead of directly approaching High Court by invoking provisions of Art.199 of the Constitution.

2016 CLD 581 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

Ss. 468 & 484Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Act (XLII of 1997), Ss. 2(1)(31), 33 & 34Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199Constitutional petitionAlternate efficacious remedyRemoval from Directorship

Respondent was Chief Executive Officer and Director of petitioner company who was removed from his position through a resolution passed in Extraordinary General Meeting

Decision of the Meeting was set aside by Registrar Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan on the ground that the same was in violation of injunctive order passed by Civil Court

Plea raised by respondent was that the petition was not maintainable as the petitioner had adequate alternate remedy available

Validity

Rule that High Court would not entertain a petition under Art. 199 of the Constitution when other appropriate remedy was available was not a rule of law barring jurisdiction of High Court

When law provided an adequate remedy, constitutional jurisdiction under Art. 199 of the Constitution could be exercised in exceptional circumstances

Exceptional circumstances which could justify invoking jurisdiction under Art.199 of the Constitution when adequate remedy was available, were when the order or action assailed was palpably without jurisdiction, mala fide, void or coram non judice

Tendency to bypass remedy provided under relevant statute by resorting to constitutional jurisdiction of High court was to be discouraged so that legislative intent was not defeated

Constitutional jurisdiction under Art. 199 could not be readily resorted to when matters amenable to jurisdiction of exclusive forum was mandated by the Constitution itself or when hierarchy provided under a statute ended up in appeal, revision or reference before High Court or directly before Supreme Court

High Court in exercising its jurisdiction would take into consideration whether the remedy provided under the statute was illusory or not

Adequate remedies having been provided under Companies Ordinance, 1984, in the context of orders in question, petitioner failed to make out a case that order in question suffered from palpable want to jurisdiction, was void, coram non judice or based upon mala fide

Petition was dismissed under circumstances.

2013 PCrLJ 1671 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Ss. 22-A & 22-BConstitution of Pakistan, Art. 199Constitutional petitionAlternate efficacious remedyScopeJustice of Peace, powers of

Petitioner, inter alia sought directions from the High Court to the effect that a criminal case be registered against the respondents and the Police be directed not to harass the petitioner and not to arrest him in the F.I.R. lodged against him

Validity

Justice of Peace may issue appropriate directions to the police authorities concerned on a complaint regarding non-registration of a criminal case, and such alternate and adequate remedy was available to the petitioner

No compelling circumstances had been pointed out by the petitioner as to why he approached High Court by invoking its Constitutional jurisdiction

Jurisdiction under Ss.22-A & 22-B, Cr.P.C. was vested both in the High Court and Court of Session as a rule of propriety

Where concurrent jurisdiction was vested in two courts then the subordinate court should to be approached in the first instance

Where remedy of approaching Justice of Peace under Ss.22-A & 22-B of the Cr.P.C. was available and the same was a more efficacious and speedy remedy, which the petitioner may avail instead of invoking the Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court

No legal force existed in the petitioner's contention that the police be ordered not to arrest the petitioner as the High Court could not interfere in the investigation

High Court observed that the Police officers should be given a freehand to investigate the case with their own wisdom unless mala fide was shown

Constitutional petition being merit less, was dismissed, in circumstances.