| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2013 SLG 1715 2013 SLD 1715 2013 PLD 829 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Constitution Petition No.127 of 2012; H.R.C. No.40927-S of2012 and Civil Miscellaenous Appeal No.176/2012 inConstitution Petition No.Nil of 2012, decision dated:11-04-2013. dates of hearing: 26th, 27th, 28th, 29-03-2013and 2nd, 3rd, 8th, 9th, 10th and
ANWAR ZAHEER, JAMALI, MIAN SAQIB NISAR, EJAZ AFZAL KHAN, MUHAMMAD ATHER SAEED AND IQBAL HAMEEDUR RAHMAN, JJ
Hamid Khan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and M.S. Khattak, Advocate-on-Record for Justices (R) Rustam Ali Malik, Rana M. Arshad Khan, Ghulam Sarwar Sheikh, Farrukh Latif, Pervez Ahmed, Muhammad Jehangir Arshad and Ahmed Farooq Sheikh. Munir A. Malik, S
Constitution Petition No.127 of 2012; H.R.C. No.40927-S of2012 and Civil Miscellaenous Appeal No.176/2012 inConstitution Petition No.Nil of 2012, decision dated:11-04-2013. dates of hearing: 26th, 27th, 28th, 29-03-2013and 2nd, 3rd, 8th, 9th, 10th and
ANWAR ZAHEER, JAMALI, MIAN SAQIB NISAR, EJAZ AFZAL KHAN, MUHAMMAD ATHER SAEED AND IQBAL HAMEEDUR RAHMAN, JJ
Hamid Khan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and M.S. Khattak, Advocate-on-Record for Justices (R) Rustam Ali Malik, Rana M. Arshad Khan, Ghulam Sarwar Sheikh, Farrukh Latif, Pervez Ahmed, Muhammad Jehangir Arshad and Ahmed Farooq Sheikh. Munir A. Malik, S
H.R.C. No.40927-S of 2012(APPLICATION BY ABDUL REHMAN FAROOQ PIRZADA)(BEGUM NUSRAT ALI GONDA
VS
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others)
Law:
Section:
(a) Constitution of Pakistan---Arts. 188, 187 & 184(3)---Judgment of the Supreme Court laying down an incorrect law---Power of Supreme Court to reopen, revisit or review such a ---Scope---Supreme Court had unlimited jurisdiction to reopen, revisit or review, and for such purpose examine any earlier pronounced by it to set the law correct, to cure injustice, save it from becoming an abuse of the process of law and the judicial system---Supreme Court was competent to pass any order to foster the cause of justice; eliminating the chances of perpetuating illegality and to save an aggrieved party from being rendered remediless. Abdul Ghaffar-Abdul Rehman's case PLD 1998 SC 363; Sindh High Court Bar Association's case PLD 2009 SC 879; Justice Khurshid Anwar Bhinder's case PLD 2010 SC 483; Syed Wajihul Hassan Zaidi v. Government of the Punjab and others PLD 2004 SC 801 and Mrs.Shahida Zahir Abbasi v. President of Pakistan PLD 1996 SC 632 ref. (b) Constitution of Pakistan--- ----Arts. 205, Fifth Sched. 184(3) & 188---Suo motu review proceedings of of the Supreme Court titled Accountant General Sindh and others v. Ahmed Ali U. Qureshi and others (PLD 2008 SC 522), wherein it was held that retired judges of the High Court were entitled to get pension and pensionary benefits with other privileges admissible to them from the date of their respective retirements, irrespective of their length of service as such Judges---Maintainability---Public interest litigation---Plea that present suo motu review proceedings had emanated from a note of the Registrar of the Supreme Court, who in such regard, had no judicial or administrative jurisdiction or authority at all to undertake such critical examination of an earlier of the Supreme Court, which had become final, following the doctrine of stare decisis, and became past and closed transaction---Validity---Even if the note of the Registrar was improper and its contents were discarded, at the same time the issue in relation to the illegality of a , which had taken the form of a precedent laying down an incorrect law, and its colossal fallout on the public exchequer, which had brought it within the domain of public interest…
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