Supplementary Budget Statement
Supplementary Budget Statement legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Federal Government was under an obligation to lay the Supplementary Budget Statement before the National Assembly so that it was subjected to the same scrutiny and procedure as was applicable to the Annual Budget Statement in terms of Arts. 80 to 83 of the Constitution
Supplementary Budget Statement, in the normal course, was to be placed before the National Assembly during the currency of the same financial year, if the Federal Government had decided to authorize such expenditure.
"Supplementary Budget Statement", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124944541
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Supplementary Budget Statement"
2015 M L D 117
Engineer ZAMRAK KHAN — Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN through Chief Secretary and another — Respondents
Court: BalochistanP L D 2014 Supreme Court 131
Constitutional Petition No.20 of 2013, Human Rights Case No.11504-G of 2013 and Civil Miscellaneous Applications Nos. 2960, 3566, 3579, 3649, 3865, 4022, 4135, 4208 and 4498 of 2013
Court: High Court2018 P L C (C
Mian MUHAMMAD SHAFIQUE and 2 others Versus SECRETARY AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY MUZAFFARABAD and 2 others
Court: High Court (AJ&K)L D 1990 Lahore 401
WASI ZAFAR ‑‑‑ Petitioner Versus SPEAKER PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLY ‑‑‑ Respondent
Court: ‑‑‑ Art. 199 ‑‑‑ Proceedings in Constitutional petition ‑‑‑ Adjournment ‑‑‑ Advocate General remained present on the last date of hearing ‑‑‑ Advocate‑General seeking adjournment through a private legal practitioner instead of deputing any one out of the Additional Advocates‑General and the team of the Assistant Advocates‑General, the Law officers appointed by the Provincial Government‑‑‑ Request for adjournment was opposed by the petitioner saying that adjournment was being sought to frustrate the petition as well as the prayer for interim relief and, if the request for adjournment was allowed petition would be rendered infructuous ‑‑‑ High Court, in view of such unprecedented conduct of Advocate General, and other Law Officers and the fact that no justification was made out for adjourning the petition, decided to proceed with the same and not to adjourn it and allowed the petitioner to continue with his arguments.‑‑Advocate General ‑‑‑ Adjournment.P L D 2004 Lahore 38
SHAH MUQEEM PRESS CLUB — Petitioner Versus CHIEF MINISTER and others — Respondents
Court: High CourtP L D 2016 Supreme Court 676
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of National Food Security and Research, Islamabad — Petitioner Versus AGRITECH LIMITED and others — Respondents
Court: High CourtP L D 2021 Supreme Court 446
C.M.A. No.490 of 2021 in Constitution Petition No. 20 of 2013
Court: Supreme Court of PakistanP L D 1978 Lahore 864
CRESCENT SUGAR MILLS & DISTILLERY LTD.- Petitioner Versus PAKISTAN AND OTHERS-Respondents
Court:P L D 2016 Supreme Court 808
Messrs MUSTAFA IMPEX, KARACHI and others — Appellants Versus The GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Finance, Islamabad and others — Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of PakistanP L D 2010 Karachi 218
ZAHID SAEED and 4 others — Petitioners Versus CITY DISTRICT GOVERNMENT, KARACHI through District Coordination Officer and 3 others — Respondents
Court: High Court