Case Details

Citation(s)
2008 SLG 1908 2008 SLD 1908 2008 SCMR 1650
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No.409 of 2008, decision dated: 26-05-2008.(On appeal from the judgment, dated 7-4-2008 passed by High Court of Sindh at Sukkur, in C.P. No.D-151 of 2008)
MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR AND MIAN HAMID FAROOQ, JJ
Abdul Mujeeb Pirzada, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Raja Shafqat Abbasi, Advocate Supreme Court, Ms. Mehreen Anwar Rafi, Advocate Supreme Court and Arshad Ali Chaudhry, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 5-22. S.K. Anwar, Asstt.

Syed NASIR HUSSAIN SHAH

VS

ZILA NAIB NAZIM, SUKKUR and 21 others

Law:

Section:

(a) Sindh Local Government Ordinance (XXVII of 2001)----Ss. 24 & 42---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Recall of a Zila Nazim---Procedure---Provision of S.24, Sindh Local Government Ordinance, 2001 is mandatory and requires that recall motion must be considered and put for voting in terms of S.24(3) & (4) of the Ordinance---If the motion would be adjourned without putting for voting, same would be deemed to be pending for consideration---Bye-laws of Zila Council framed under S.42 of the Ordinance for the purpose of regulating the business of House cannot override the statutory provisions and S.24 of the Ordinance containing procedural as well as substantive provisions on the subject would prevail, therefore, there would be no legal effect of the bye-laws by virtue of which quorum for a special or urgent meeting is not necessary---No adverse action having been taken against Zila Nazim in the recall motion and same having been adjourned was still pending for consideration---Principles. Section 24 of the Sindh Local Government Ordinance, 2001 would show that this is mandatory requirement of law that recall motion must be considered and put for voting in terms of subsections (3) and (4) of section 24 of the Ordinance and if the motion is adjourned without putting same on voting, it would be deemed to be pending for consideration. The bye-law of Zila Council framed under section 42 of the Ordinance for the purpose of regulating the business of House cannot override the statutory provisions and section 24 of the Ordinance containing procedural as well as substantive provisions on the subject would prevail, therefore, there would be no legal effect of the bye-laws by virtue of which quorum for a special or urgent meeting is not necessary. In the present case the motion was moved in accordance with law and proceedings of the House were not adjourned in breach of any provision of law invalidating the recall motion, therefore, putting off the motion to another date for consideration, neither caused any prejudice to the petitioner nor it offended any law and consequently, the petitioner without pointing out any illegality in the proceedings, could not…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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