Home Maxims & Terms Contravention of Fundamental Rights meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Contravention of Fundamental Rights

Contravention of Fundamental Rights legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

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

2017 SCMR 637 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
Arts. 18, 25, 27, 184(3) & 242Sindh Public Service Commission Act (XI of 1989), S. 7(i)Suo motu action regarding eligibility of Chairman and Members of Sindh Public Service Commission ('Commission')Nepotism and corruption in selection and appointment process for civil servantsContravention of Fundamental Rights

When through a discriminatory selection process civil servants were selected and appointed, it would infringe Art. 27 of the Constitution which stated that, "No citizen otherwise qualified for appointment in the service of Pakistan shall be discriminated against"

Article 25 of the Constitution, prescribing the equality of citizens, was another Fundamental Right which was attracted if all those who were tested and interviewed were not treated equally

Present matter also involved the contravention of the Fundamental Right in Art. 18 of the Constitution, which mandates, that, "every citizen shall have the right to enter upon any lawful profession or occupation"

Suo motu case was disposed of accordingly.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Contravention of Fundamental Rights", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124959538

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Contravention of Fundamental Rights"

PLC(CS) 2001
Writ Petition No. 285 of 1991, decided on 2nd February, 2001.

2001 P L C (C

COTTON EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSOCIAATION, COTTON RESEARCH INSTITUTE, MULTAN through Senior Vice-President Versus PAKISTAN CENTRAL COTTON COMMITTEE

Court: Lahore High Court
MLD 1997
Writ Petition No.3384/M of 1996, decided on 25th November, 1996.

1997 M L D 1792

Mst. MUKHTIAR FATIMA ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MULTAN and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
PLC(CS) 2024
Suit No.2841 of 2021 (along with other connected suits), decided on 19th September, 2022.

2024 P L C (C

ALI ADNAN ARIF TABBA and others Versus NATIONAL DATABASE REGISTRATION AUTHORITY and 3 others

Court: Sindh High Court
PLD 2005
N/A

2005L73

N/A

Court: High Court
SCMR 1988
Civil Petition Leave to Appeal No.57‑R of 1988, decided on 7th March, 1988.

1988 S C M R 972

ABDUL RASHID KHAN and 6 others‑‑Petitioners Versus SWAT TEXTILE MILLS LTD., HARIPUR and

Court: High Court
PLD 2014
2013-December-11

P L D 2014 Sindh 218

IMRAN AHMED — Petitioner Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Interior, Islamabad and 2 others — Respondents

Court: High Court
PLD 2012
2012-August-28

P L D 2012 Balochistan 214

Begum NASREEN KHETRAN — Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, QUETTA through Secretary and another — Respondents

Court: High Court
PLD 2016
N/A

P L D 2016 Peshawar 57

YOUSAF AYUB KHAN — Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary, Peshawar and 2 others — Respondents

Court: High Court
PLC 2013
Constitutional Petition No.D-555 of 2011, decided on 14th February, 2013.

2013 P L C 273

MUHAMMAD KHALIQULLAH SIDDIQUI Versus SINDH LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL and 5 others

Court: Sindh High Court
PLD 1978
I. C. A. No. 118 of 1975, decided on 10th June 1978:

P L D 1978 Lahore 1298

PROVINCE OF PUNJAB THROUGH ITS HOME SECRETARY, AND 3 OTHERS-Appellants Versus GULZAR HASSAN, ADVOCATE AND 8 OTHERS-Respondents

Court: -- Arts. 8, 143, 232(4), 233 & 268 read with Arts. 184(3) & 199, Part II, Chap. I and Criminal Law Amendment Act (XIV of 1908), Ss. 16 & 17-A-Word "void"-Meaning and import-Laws inconsistent with Constitution-Do not die, neither still-born non est or nonexistent nor effaced or obliterated from statute book: Such law exists totally to be applicable to pre-Constitutional matters and also to those to whom Fundamental Rights afford no protection and may re-appear to be operative as soon as Fundamental Rights or supreme law cease to exist-Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908, continued in force under Art. 268-Fundamental Rights remain in existence during Proclamation of Emergency but no remedy available during such period in presence of an order under Art. 233(2)-Executive actions contemplated in Art. 233(1) necessarily concern future legislation and not any of void existing laws-Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908, inconsistent with Fundamental Right No. 17, void and so unenforceable and, therefore, not available for any executive action-Notifications issued under Ss. 16 and 17, Criminal Law Amendment Act Held, without lawful authority and of no legal effect.--Words and phrases-Interpretation of statutes.