Case Details

Citation(s)
2005 SLG 1819 2005 SLD 1819 = 2005 PLD 141
Lahore High Court
Intra-Court Appeal No. 551 of 2004 in W. P. No. 16249 of2004, decided on 1st December, 2004
MIAN SAQIB NISAR AND SYED SAKHI HUSSAIN BOKHARI, JJ
Malik Saeed Hassan and Awan Muhammad Hanif Khan for Appellant. Muhammad Ilyas Khan for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 4. Muhammad Saleem Chaudhary-1 for
Respondent No. 15. Khalid Pervez, Registrar, Cooperatives Societies Punjab, Lahore

NEK MUHAMMAD VsREGISTRAR COOPERATIVE PUNJAB, Lahore and 14 others

Law: Cooperative Societies Registration Act, 1912

Section: 48

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199

(a) Cooperative Societies Rules, 1912------R. 48---Dissolution of Election Committee by the District Officer Cooperatives followed by an order by the Registrar Cooperatives exercising his powers under the Bye-Laws of the Society dissolving the Managing Committee and appointing Administrator of the Cooperative Society---Validity---Such orders of the functionaries could not be termed as void; at the most same could be said to be erroneous, wrong or even illegal, but not' corum non judice or nullity---Said orders, therefore, could not be overlooked and shall entail legal consequences, until same were set aside by the forum of competent jurisdiction. (b) Cooperative Societies Rules, 1912------R. 48---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---Dissolution of Election Committee of the Society by the District Officers Cooperatives followed by an order by the Registrar Cooperatives exercising his powers under the Bye-laws of the Cooperative Society dissolving the Managing Committee and appointing Administrator, of the Society---Such orders were suspended till the pendency of Constitutional petition by the High Court and the Society held its election meanwhile---Validity---Suspension of the order of the High Court was a temporary arrangement which was dependent upon the final outcome of the case and on the basis of such temporary injunctive orders, no structure of any permanent nature could have been raised and rested---Exception---Order passed in the Constitutional petition, in the present case, showed that Court specifically declined the request of the petitioner to dispose of the matter as having borne fruit and the dismissal of the Constitutional petition was on the basis of withdrawal simpliciter---Such order of the Court had not been challenged, thus the same had, attained finality and elections after the dismissal of the Constitutional petition stood annulled---Principles.The suspension of the orders by the Court, till the pendency of the writ petition, obviously was a temporary arrangement, which was dependent upon the final outcome of the case, thus, on the basis of such temporary injunctive order, no structure of any permanent…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register