| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 729 2021 SLD 729 2021 CLD 370 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No. 405 of 2020, decided on 2nd November, 2020, Date of hearing: 2nd November, 2020. (Against judgment Dated 9.12.2019 passed by Lahore High Court (Rawalpindi Bench) in Writ Petition No. 275 of 2018).
UMAR ATA BANDIAL, JUSTICE, YAHYA AFRIDI, JUSTICE, SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, JUSTICE
RESPONDENT(S): Zafar Mehmood Mughal, Advocate Supreme Court
Civil Petition No. 405 of 2020, decided on 2nd November, 2020, Date of hearing: 2nd November, 2020. (Against judgment Dated 9.12.2019 passed by Lahore High Court (Rawalpindi Bench) in Writ Petition No. 275 of 2018).
UMAR ATA BANDIAL, JUSTICE, YAHYA AFRIDI, JUSTICE, SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, JUSTICE
RESPONDENT(S): Zafar Mehmood Mughal, Advocate Supreme Court
NATIONAL SAVING CENTRAL DIRECTORATE, ISLAMABAD THROUGH D.G. AND ANOTHERS
VS
MUHAMMAD FAROOQ RAJA
Law: General Clauses Act, 1897
Section: 24-A
(a) Bahbood Savings Certificates Rules, 2003--- ----Rr. 5 & 8---General Clauses Act (X of 1897), S. 24-A---Locus poenitentiae, principle of---"Bahbood Saving Certificate Scheme" ('the Scheme') introduced by the National Saving Centre ('the petitioner-Authority')---Dual national holding nationality of Pakistan and a foreign country---Whether a dual national (respondent) was eligible to avail the Scheme---Held, that respondent under the impression that he was eligible to purchase bonds under the Scheme applied for the same, in response to the acceptance shown by the petitioner-Authority invested in the Scheme as a bona fide claimant---Incentive arising out of the said Scheme was extended in favour of the respondent in accordance with the rules framed under Bahbood Saving Certificates Rules, 2003 -Authority was under an incumbent duty to scrutinize the status of the respondent prior to issuing acceptance which had accrued a right in favour of respondent---Any slackness on the part of the petitioner-Authority at belated stage could not be burdened to the respondent and the same was hit by principle of locus poenitentiae----Otherwise the case of the respondent was also covered by S. 24-A of General Clauses Act, 1897, which clearly reflected that once a right under the Scheme was accrued, the same could not be withdrawn unless and until it was established that the Scheme was availed by practicing fraud or misrepresentation---Besides respondent was a dual national, holding nationality of foreign country Denmark, which was one of the countries, whose nationality could be kept alongside nationality of Pakistan without deprivation of any legal rights under the law of the land---High Court had rightly found the respondent to be eligible for availing benefit of the Scheme---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and leave was declined. The Engineer-in-Chief Branch through Ministry of Defence, Rawalpindi and another v. Jalaluddin PLD 1992 SC 207 ref. (b) Estoppel--- ----Promissory estoppel---Government functionaries---Where Government controlled functionaries made a promise which ensued a right to anyone who believed in it and acted under the same, then such…
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