| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2002 SLG 2452 2002 SLD 2452 2002 PLD 243 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos. 475 to 478 of 1998, decided on 19th November, 2001. DATE of hearing: 27th September, 2001
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY AND HAMID ALI MIRZA, JJ
Sardar Muhammad Aslam, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant (in C.As. Nos.475 to 477 of 1998) and for
Respondent (in C.A.No. 478 of 1998). Gul Zarin Kiani, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants (in C.A. No. 478 of 19
Civil Appeals Nos. 475 to 478 of 1998, decided on 19th November, 2001. DATE of hearing: 27th September, 2001
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY AND HAMID ALI MIRZA, JJ
Sardar Muhammad Aslam, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant (in C.As. Nos.475 to 477 of 1998) and for
Respondent (in C.A.No. 478 of 1998). Gul Zarin Kiani, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants (in C.A. No. 478 of 19
CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY and others.
VS
Sub. FAQIR SHAH and others
Law:
Section:
(a) Capital Development Authority Ordinance (XIII of 1960)--- -----Ss.2(k), 30 & 36---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), -Art., 185(3) --- Leave to appeal was granted by the Supreme Court to consider, whether or not the compensation was allowed to owners of land keeping in view the mandate of law contained in Ss.2(k), 30 & 36 of Capital Development Authority Ordinance, 1960. (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)----- ----Art. 189---Decisions of Supreme Court binding on all Courts in Pakistan---Principles. The responsibility of interpreting the law of the land is of the superior Courts and law interpreted by Supreme Court is binding on all other Courts and on all functionaries of the Government and all other forums, considering same are guidance for all the Courts and Tribunals engaged in the process of administration of justice, so as to keep them in limit and control the exercise of discretion to be exercised by them. It is the duty of every authority, whether judicial or otherwise, to give effect to the law laid down by Supreme Court. (c) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- ----Art. 204---Contempt of Court Act (LXIV of 1976), Ss.3 & 4---Capital Development Authority Ordinance (XXIII of 1960), S.36---Contempt of Court---Commissioner reviewed the order of his predecessor on the ground that Supreme Court had misinterpreted the law, which misinterpretation would not be shared by him, thus, calling it as mistake patent on the face of record---Successor Commissioner by such observations had showed disrespect to decisions of Supreme Court and High Court, which prima facie would amount to contempt of Supreme Court warranting legal consequences---Notice was issued to Commissioner to show cause as to why proceedings under Art.204 of Constitution read with Ss.3 and 4 of Contempt of Court Act, 1976, be not initiated against him for showing his wilful disobedience and disrespect to the dignity and decorum of Supreme Court and High Court in violation of such provisions. (d) Capital Development Authority Ordinance (XIU of 1960)--- ----S. 2(k)---Determination of market value classification-wise---Guidelines. Sardar Begum and others v. Capital Development Authority 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