Case Details

Citation(s)
2013 SLG 724 2013 SLD 724 2013 CLC 684
High Court (AJ&K)
Writ Petition No.1829 of 2012, decided 31st December, 2012
GHULAM MUSTAFA MUGHAL, C.J. MUNIR AHMED CHAUDHARY AND M. TASSUM AFTAB ALVI, JJ

SHERIJ KHAN and 3 otherssvsAZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Chief Secretary and 12 others

Law: Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974

Section: 44

Law: Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974

Section: 44

(a) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974)-------S. 44---Writ jurisdiction of High Court---Fundamental condition---Applicant invoking such jurisdiction must be an aggrieved person, but not essential in the cases of writ of quo warranto and habeas corpus---Principles. The constitutional jurisdiction has been conferred on the High Court by section 44 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974, subject to the other provisions of the Act and restrictions imposed by section 44 of the said Act. One of the fundamental conditions and requirement is that in order to invoke the jurisdiction of the High Court under the above mentioned section; an applicant must be an aggrieved person. Only two exceptions are provided by the section itself i.e. section 44(2)(b)(i) and (ii), which deals with writ of Quo Warranto and Habeas Corpus. To qualify as an aggrieved person, a right in strict juristic sense may not vest in a person, yet he must at least show that he has some interest that respondent(s) should act in accordance with law. Ghiasul Haq and others v. Azad Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir etc. PLD 1980 SC AJK 5; Muhammad Malik v. Karam Elahi and another PLD 2011 SC (AJK) 1; Umer Din Kiani v. Azad Government and 2 others 1995 SCR 166 and PLD 2002 SC (AJ&K) 1 rel. (b) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974)--- ----S. 44---Writ petition---Medical Colleges, admission in---Notification dated 31-1-2012 issued by Government reserving quota in such Colleges for Overseas Kashmiris and doctor's children---Validity---Authority had annexed merit list along with written statement indicating nominations of candidates against their respective quota including quota in question---No writ could be issued against the nominated candidates without affording them opportunity of hearing---Two petitioners (candidates) had got admission in relevant session---Other two petitioners (candidates) could not be admitted even after declaring impugned quota as ultra vires of the Constitution and added same in general merit or district wise quota---Petitioners for not being aggrieved persons could not be granted any…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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