| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1974 SLG 264 1974 SLD 264 1974 SCMR 595 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 168 of 1973 in Civil Appeal No. 82 of 1972, decision dated: 5th November 1973.(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated the 2nd June 1971, in Civil Miscellaneous No. 1451 of 1971)
HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C.J., SALAHUDDIN AHMED AND ANWARUL HAQ, JJ
Appellant in person. Nemo for
Respondents
Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 168 of 1973 in Civil Appeal No. 82 of 1972, decision dated: 5th November 1973.(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated the 2nd June 1971, in Civil Miscellaneous No. 1451 of 1971)
HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C.J., SALAHUDDIN AHMED AND ANWARUL HAQ, JJ
Appellant in person. Nemo for
Respondents
GHULAM HASSAN KHAN, B.A., LL.B.
VS
MR. JUSTICE MUSHTAQ HUSSAIN, CHAIRMAN ENROLMENT COMMITTEE, PROVINCIAL BAR COUNCIL AND ANOTHER
Law:
Section:
Legal Practitioners Act (XVIII of 1879)------ S. 36-Tout-Enrolxent as legal practitioner-Petitioner declared tout-Supreme Court observing that a person declared tout could reform himself and if so done he could b9 enrolled as legal practitioner and directing petitioner's application for enrolment as legal practitioner to be considered afresh-Enrolment Committee in possession of full facts about petitioner including certain cases against him referred to Committee after passing of Supreme Court's order-Keeping petitioner's application for enrolment pending till his conduct cleared-No contempt of Supreme Court-Enrolment Committee alone had jurisdiction to grant or refuse licence. ORDER SALAHUDDIN AHMED, J.-This petitioner was appellant in Civil Appeal No. 82 of 1972 which was allowed by this Court on the 30th of January 1973. He had been declared a tout by the High Court under section 36 of the Legal Practitioners Act, 187), on the 19th of March, 1969. Having been aggrieved by this order he bad approached this Court and obtained special leave to appeal, and Civil Appeal No. 82 of 1972 was the result. In the present petition the petitioner has applied to this Court for drawing up contempt proceedings against the Chairman and the Member of the Enrolment Committee, Provincial Bar Council, Lahore, who are respondents Nos. 1 and 2 herein, respectively, and for directing the Enrolment Committee to enroll the petitioner as an Advocate. It is alleged that the respondents have disobeyed the order of this Court passed in the aforesaid appeal. The operative part of the said order reads thus :- " ,,,.We allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order of the High Court, but pass no order as to costs. We shall like to observe that the Bar Council may consider afresh the application of the appellant for enrolment, if acid when it is renewed.". In course of our judgment in the appeal, we had made the following observations:- " The learned Judge seems to have proceeded on the untenable presumption that the appellant having once been declared a tout continued to be so for all time to come. In our opinion it is always desirable to afford an erring person a chance to reform and…
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