| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1970 SLG 3100 1970 SLD 3100 = 1970 SCMR 601 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 25 of 1970, decided on 3rd March 1970.
Presented By: Hamoodur Rahman, C. J. and Sajjad Ahmad, J
Farrukh Ameen, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Masood Akhtar, Advocate- on-Record for Petitioners. Nemo for
Respondents.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 25 of 1970, decided on 3rd March 1970.
Presented By: Hamoodur Rahman, C. J. and Sajjad Ahmad, J
Farrukh Ameen, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Masood Akhtar, Advocate- on-Record for Petitioners. Nemo for
Respondents.
MESSRS MEHFIL CINEMA THROUGH FAIZANUL HAQ, THE MANAGING PARTNER Petitioners
VERSUS
GOVERNMENT OF WEST PAKISTAN THROUGH MEMBER, EXCISE AND TAXATION BOARD OF REVENUE WEST PAKISTAN, LAHORE AND ANOTHER -Respondents
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1962
Section: 98
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 21st January 1970, in Writ Petition No. 1785 of 1969). Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 98-Writ proceedings Petitioner failing to appear before High Court in his writ petition cannot complain against orders passed. Date of hearing : 3rd March 1970. JUDGMENT HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C. J.-The petitioner in this case filed a writ petition in the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore Seat, to challenge the validity of certain notices issued in pursuance to section 6-A of the West Pakistan Entertainments Duty Act, 1958, as inserted by the West Pakistan Entertain ments Duty Ordinance, 1969. The petitioner also maintained that the Ordinance of 1969 was itself ultra vires. Along with the writ petition a Civil Miscellaneous applica tion was also moved for staying the operation of the orders issued by the authorities under the above-mentioned provisions. When both these matters came up for hearing before a Division Bench of the High Court, no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner. But the High Court, instead of dismissing both the writ petition as well as the Misc. Application for non-prosecution, heard the learned Advocate-General and admitted the writ petition for a regular hearing on the ground that the questions arising in it which had been noticed in an earlier order passed by the High Court on the 4th December 1969, possibly in some other petition, were of some public importance. The recovery of the tax purported to be levied in pursuance of these provisions was also stayed suo moto to the extent that the demands were in excess of 50 per cent. The petitioner concerned has now come up for special leave…