| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2011 SLG 848 2011 SLD 848 2011 PLD 7 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No.555 of 2008 and HR Cases Nos.23115-S and 16229-S of 2010, decision dated: 5-11-2010. (On appeal against the judgment dated 3-4-2008 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Writ Petition No.8932 of 2007)
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J., TARIQ PARVEZ KHAN AND GHULAM RABBANI, JJ
Syed Najmul Hassan Kazmi, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and M.S. Khattak, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants.
Civil Appeal No.555 of 2008 and HR Cases Nos.23115-S and 16229-S of 2010, decision dated: 5-11-2010. (On appeal against the judgment dated 3-4-2008 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Writ Petition No.8932 of 2007)
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J., TARIQ PARVEZ KHAN AND GHULAM RABBANI, JJ
Syed Najmul Hassan Kazmi, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and M.S. Khattak, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants.
SECRETARY, MINISTARY OF LAW, PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND HUMAN RIGHTS, GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB and others
VS
MUHAMMAD ASHRAF KHAN and others
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 140
Law: Punjab Law Department Manual, 1938
Section: R.1.18
(a) Constitution of Pakistan-------Art. 140---Punjab Law Department Manual (1938), R.1.18 [as substituted by notification No.8-16/93/5671 dated 3-11-1994]---Advocate-General, appointment of---Article 140 of the Constitution does not envisage requirement of consultation by the Governor with the Chief Justice while making the appointment of Advocate-General---By no stretch of imagination could R.1.18 of the Law Department Manual (Punjab), 1938 (as amended by the notification dated 19-10-1993 and suspended by the notification dated 3-11-1994), which provided for consultation by the Governor with the High Court in the matter of appointment of Additional Advocate-General or Assistant Advocate General, be made applicable to the appointment of Advocate-General of the Province, which was a constitutional office and was governed by the express provisions of the Constitution---Such would be a clear case of non-reading of the relevant legal instrument. Al-Jehad Trust v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1996 SC 324 off the mark. Manendra Nath Rai v. Virendra Bhatia AIR 2004 Allahabad 133; Malik Hamid Sarfraz v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1979 SC 991; Basu's Constitution of India; Justice (Retd) Fazal Karim's Book "Access to Justice", P.14; Muhammad Khurshid Khan v. Returning Officer 1998 SCMR 425; G.D. Karkare v. T.L. Shevde AIR 1952 Nagpur 330; Atlas Cycle Industries Ltd. Sonepat v. Their Workmen 1962 Supp. (3) SCR 89 and State of Uttaranchal v. Balwant Singh Chaufal, decided on 18th January, 2010 ref. (b) Constitution of Pakistan--- ----Art. 140---Advocate General, appointment of---Person appointed as Advocate-General has to be one who is qualified for appointment as a Judge of the High Court, but that does not mean that he also does not suffer from the disqualifications or disabilities envisaged in respect of the office of Judge---Such a person cannot be deemed to be under the same disability as has been placed by the Constitution on a Judge of the High Court in other respects. Malik Hamid Sarfaraz v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1979 SC 991 ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J.---This appeal with the leave of the Court is directed against the…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492