| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2018 SLG 41 2018 SLD 41 2018 PLJ 134 |
Lahore High Court
W.P. No. 39416 of 2016, decided on 19.10.2017. Date of hearing: 19.1.2017.
MASUD ABID NAQVI, JUSTICE
Mr. Abdul Razzaq Rajab, Advocate for Petitioners. Mr. Taffazal H. Rizvi, Advocate for PCB.
W.P. No. 39416 of 2016, decided on 19.10.2017. Date of hearing: 19.1.2017.
MASUD ABID NAQVI, JUSTICE
Mr. Abdul Razzaq Rajab, Advocate for Petitioners. Mr. Taffazal H. Rizvi, Advocate for PCB.
MUHAMMAD AKRAM ETC.
VS
SCRUTINY COMMITTEE, DISTRICT SARGODHA, PAKISTAN CRICKET BOARD ETC.
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Constitution of Pakistan, 1973-- ----Art. 199--Constitutional jurisdiction--Scope--Validity--It should not be invoked where alternative forum under a special law, duly empowered to decide controversy is available and functioning. Where a special law provides legal remedy for the resolution of a dispute, the intention of legislature in creating such remedy is that disputes falling within ambit of such forum be taken only before it for resolution--Petition was dismissed. 2016 SCMR 842, ref. ORDER Aggrieved by the letter dated 25.08.2016, findings of the scrutiny committee wherein petitioners' cricket clubs were declared "inactive" due to the cricket clubs' failure to adopt the model Constitution of Pakistan Cricket Board ("PCB"), the petitioners filed appeals before the Election Commission of PCB which were dismissed vide order dated 02.11.2016. Thereafter, the petitioners filed appeals before the Board of Governor of PCB under Para 37(2) of the PCB Constitution and impugned the letter dated 25.08.2016 as well as order dated 02.11.2016 but the same were returned with the objection to annex/attach demand draft amounting to Rs. 100,000/- with each of the appeal vide order dated 16.11.2016. Through this petition, the petitioners have not only challenged the orders dated 25.08.2016, 02.11.2016 and 16.11.2016 being illegal, unlawful but also Para 37 of the PCB Constitution and clause 3 of conduct proceedings as against their fundamental rights. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the scrutiny committee miserably failed to properly conduct the scrutiny and findings of scrutiny committee are based on mala fide intention/ulterior motives as the petitioners' cricket clubs adopted the model Constitution in letter and spirit. The petitioners stance has not been properly taken into consideration/evaluated by the Election Commission of PCB while passing the order dated 02.11.2016. Further adds that Para 37 of the PCB Constitution and clause 3 of conduct proceedings with the condition to enclose demand draft amounting to Rs. 100,000/- with each of the appeal is against their fundamental rights as this condition defeats the concept of easy access to justice.…
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