Bye-law
Bye-law legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Pakistan Engineering Council, a statutory body framed and published Bye-laws, 1987, Bye-laws 3 whereof provided that no engineering work would be constructed or operated except by a contractor licensed as such by the Engineering Council
Respondents as approved contractors registered with other statutory corporations challenged the vires of Bye-laws 3 in Constitutional petitions
High Court declared that Bye-laws 3 was beyond the scope of authority vesting in Pakistan Engineering Council under S. 8, Pakistan Engineering Council Act, 1976 relating to functions specified therein
Validity
Pakistan Engineering Council cannot perform its functions under S. 8 of the Act satisfactorily and appropriately unless it is able to regulate activities of all those who undertake professional engineering work and, therefore, not only the profession of engineering but also professional engineering work has been incltded within the scope and purpose of Pakistan Engineering Council Act, 1976
Section 8, Pakistan Engineering Council Act, 1976 was not the only provision in the Act which specified scope and purpose of the Act but there were other provisions too, which had to be taken into account for determining its scope and purpose viz, S. 27 and S. 2(k) of the Act
High Court's failure to give adequate attention thereto, had led it to erroneous conclusion
Judgment of High Court to the effect that Bye-laws 3 of Bye-laws framed under S. 25, Pakistan Engineering Council Act, 1976 was ultra-vices was set aside in circumstances.
Pakistan Engineering Council, a statutory body framed and published Bye-laws 1987; Bye-law 3 whereof provided that no engineering works would be constructed or operated except by a Contractor licensed as such by the Engineering Council
Respondents, as approved Contractors registered with other statutory corporations challenged the, vires of Bye-law 3 in Constitutional petitions
High Court declared that Bye-law 3 was beyond the scope of authority vesting in Pakistan Engineering Council under S.8, Pakistan Engineering Council Act 1976, relating to functions specified therein
Leave to appeal
Petitioner defended vires of the Bye-law 3 by reference to S.2(K) of Pakistan Engineering Council Act, 1976, which defines `Professional Engineering Works' read with S.27, which provides penalty for those who employ persons whose names were not bor
"Bye-law", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/13864
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Bye-law"
1991 S C M R 174
PAKISTAN ENGINEERING COUNCIL‑‑‑Petitioner Versus AFZAL ANWAR ASSOCIATES and others‑‑‑Respondents
Court: High CourtP L D 1954 Sind 247
MESSRS. FARIDSONS LTD.‑Plaintiff Versus MESSRS. S. M. FAZAIL & COMPANY‑Defendant
Court:2000 P L C (C
ARSHAD AHMAD KHAN Versus THE CHAIRMAN, BANK OF PUNJAB, LAHORE and 2 others
Court: Lahore High Court2022 M L D 859
WAJID RASOOL — Petitioner Versus REGISTRAR COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES and others — Respondents
Court: Lahore (Multan Bench)1995SCMR802
PAKISTAN ENGINEERING COUNCIL and another‑‑‑Appellants Versus AFZAL ANWAR ASSOCIATES and another‑‑‑Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of PakistanP L D 1982 Karachi 414
Petitioner Versus MESSRS ABDUL SHAKOOR & BROTHERS, KARACHI
Court: S. 19 read with Karachi Cotton Association Limited Bye Laws 39‑I, 39=II, 157 & 159‑Factory selection contract ‑ Arbitration award, setting aside of‑Appellants admittedly refusing to appoint their Arbitrators, respondents consequently appointing arbitrators on behalf of appellants‑Bye‑Law 39‑11 of Association providing appoint ment of two arbitrators from panels of sellers and buyers of Cotton by Association and not by parties themselves fact of respondents having invoked Bye‑Law 39‑I instead of 39‑II in a case of factory selection contract, held, vitiated arbitration proceedings and award given as a result thereof‑Cotton broker's note contemplating selec tion, weighment, delivery and payment of price at factory‑Such contract for all interests and , purposes having to be performed at appellant's factory, held, a factory selection contract.‑Contract Award.P L D 2005 Supreme Court 792
PAKISTAN DEFENCE OFFICERS HOUSING AUTHORITY, KARACHI — Appellant Versus SHAMIM KHAN through L. Rs. and 5 others — Respondents
Court: (a) Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Authority Order P.O.No.7 of 1980---P L D 1953 Sind 18
MESSRS UNIVERSAL CORPORATION‑Plaintiffs Versus MESSRS S. A. RAUF & Co.‑Defendants
Court: High Court1989 P T D 705
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, U.P.II, LUCKNOW Versus BAZPUR CO-OPERATIVE SUGAR FACTORY LTD., BAZPUR, DISTRICT NAINITAL
Court: Supreme Court of India2007 C L C 631
DEFENCE HOUSING AUTHORITY-Appellant Versus NASIRA WAZIR ALI and 2 others — Respondents
Court: Karachi