| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1968 SLG 85 1968 SLD 85 1968 PLD 1 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. K-28 of 1965, decision dated: 16th October 1967. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Karachi Bench, Karachi, dated the 25th February 1964, in Writ Petition No. 203 of 1960)
A. R. CORNELIUS, C.J., S. A. RAHMAN, FAZLEAKBAR, HAMOODUR RAHMAN AND MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, JJ
A. K. Brohi, Senior Advocate (Sayed M. Sadiq, Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by Ghulam Ali Memon, Attorney for Appellants. M. Halim, Assistant Advocate General West Pakistan (Syed Mazhar Ali, Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by Sh
Civil Appeal No. K-28 of 1965, decision dated: 16th October 1967. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Karachi Bench, Karachi, dated the 25th February 1964, in Writ Petition No. 203 of 1960)
A. R. CORNELIUS, C.J., S. A. RAHMAN, FAZLEAKBAR, HAMOODUR RAHMAN AND MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, JJ
A. K. Brohi, Senior Advocate (Sayed M. Sadiq, Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by Ghulam Ali Memon, Attorney for Appellants. M. Halim, Assistant Advocate General West Pakistan (Syed Mazhar Ali, Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by Sh
MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM MUNSHEY AND OTHERS
VS
PROVINCE OF WEST PAKISTAN THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY AND others Nos. 4, 7 to 10 and 12 to 26 : Ex parte.
Law:
Section:
(a) Laws (Continuance in Force) Order (I of 1958), Arts. 2(4) & 4(1) and Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Arts. 98 & 250-Writ petition filed on 29-6-60 and more respondents added on 11-5-1962-Petition again amended on 29-9-1963 praying for further relief-Rule of decision, held, must be according to law prevailing at time of commencement of proceedings i.e., Laws (Continuance in Force) Order and not Constitution of Pakistan (1962). Certain Government Officers filed a writ petition before the High Court on the 29th June 1960 praying for a certiorari to quash a directive of Government relating to the fixation of their seniority and for a mandamus prohibiting the implementation thereof. Subsequently on their request certain more persons were allowed to be impleaded as parties to the petition on the 11th May 1962. Again on the 27th September 1963 the writ petition was amended praying for further relief. It was contended on behalf of the added respondents that since the petition was amended after the Constitution (1962) came into force, the proceedings against them commenced from the latter date and that under Article 98(3)(b) of the Constitution no order could be passed in respect of a condition of service not specified in the Constitution itself; Held, that in the absence of any provision in the present Constitution for the abatement of pending proceedings the rule of decision must be according to the law prevailing at the time the proceedings were commenced. There can be no doubt that even on the date the added respondents were impleaded the High Court was not debarred from issuing writs with regard to matters relating to the fixation of the proper seniority of public servants. The power that the High Court was, in the present case, called upon to exercise was under the Laws (Continuance in Force) Order, 1958, and not under Article 98 of the present Constitution. That power remained unaffected with regard to pending proceedings, for, the Constitution itself by Article 250 preserved that power notwithstanding the repeal of the Laws (Continuance in Force) Order, 1958. The fact that a further prayer was added subsequently did not mean that a new case was…
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