Friday, 23 March 2012

Judgement Related with PMDC

Citation Name : 2004 PLD 168 SUPREME-COURT
Side Appellant : SHAFIQUE AHMED
Side Opponent : GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB
—-Preamble, Ss.37 & 5—Pakistan Medical and Dental Council Ordinance (XXXII of 1962), Preamble—University of the Punjab Act (IX of 1973), Ss.5 & 7—Constitution of Pakistan (1973). Arts.4, 25 & 185(3)-Vires of University of Health Sciences Ordinance, 2002–Contentions of the petitioners (Students of the Medical Colleges) were that provisions of University of Health Sciences Ordinance, 2002 with regard to affiliation were violative of the Pakistan Medical and Dental Council Ordinance, 1962 and a letter issued by the Vice-Chancellor, University of Health Sciences was violative of the spirit of the University of Health Sciences Ordinance, 2002 in general and its S.37 in particular; that the provisions relating to affiliation and disaffiliation were violative of the Fundamental Rights enshrined in the Constitution; that the exemption from affiliation granted to two medical colleges was discriminatory and violative of Arts.4 & 25 of the Constitution; that S.37 of the Ordinance had no retrospective application; that the provision in regard to compulsory disaffiliation of medical colleges was violative of the University of the Punjab Act, 1973 and the calendar framed there under and the petitioners had a vested right to be examined by the University of the Punjab in View of the principle of legitimate expectation—ValidityNotwithstanding the fact that University of Health Sciences Ordinance, 2002 and the judgment of the High Court had been challenged only by 4 out of 6000 students of the medical colleges and none of the colleges affiliated with the University of Health Sciences had expressed any grievance, University of Health Sciences Ordinance, 2002 was not only a valid enactment but was also not ultra vires the Constitution and the contentions were devoid of substance–Expression For the time being” used in the notification had made manifest that the exemption complained of was transitory and the possibility of affiliation of both the exempted medical colleges with the University of Health Sciences in due course of time could not be excluded, therefore, alleged discrimination did not flow from a transitory arrangement—Scope of the letter to the Medical Colleges with regard to the process of affiliation by the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Health Sciences was no better than an intimation about the requisite affiliation and thus its conflict with S.37 of the University of Health Sciences Ordinance, 2002 could not be contended at all—Legitimate expectation set up by the petitioners was neither reasonable nor had the backing of any law or any rule of the Prospectus of the Government Medical Colleges because the same Was revised yearly to update the changes arid contained inbuilt provisions to the effect that the students of Medical Colleges shall be bound to abide by the rules and regulations laid down therein and the changes issued by the Government from time to time and the Government reserved the right of additions and alterations of any rule in the prospectus at any stage—Affiliation of Medical College with the University of Health Sciences had not deprived the petitioners of any benefit which might have accrued to them had their college remained affiliated with the University of the Punjab; petitioners will remain affiliated with their college and get the same M.13-B.S. degree at the conclusion of the five years course which would have been, awarded by the University of the Punjab—University of Health Sciences was a Specialist University which had been established, inter alia, to improve the quality and standard of education and meet the challenges and requirements of the changing times and had also been accorded requisite recognition by the Pakistan Medical and Dental Council, therefore, anxiety of the petitioners about the status of the degree of M.B.,B.S. to be awarded by it was unfounded–High Court , having disposed of the matter through an elaborate judgment, Supreme Court declined to grant leave to appeal against the same

Judgement of Agreement by Supreme Court

Citation Name : 2011 PLD 241 SUPREME-COURT
Side Appellant : Hafiz TASSADUQ HUSSAIN
Side Opponent : MUHAMMAD DIN through Legal Heirs
Arts. 17, 72 & 79—-Constitution of Pakistan, Art.185(3)–-Leave to Appeal was granted by Supreme Court to consider; whether scribe of agreement having appeared as witness to prove agreement to sell could assume the role of attesting witness; and whether in the light of judgment passed by Supreme Court in another case, testimony of one marginal witness was enough to prove execution of such agreement, if his statement otherwise was confidence inspiring.

Judgement on PTCL statutory organization or not

2011 PLD 132 Supreme Court...
S. 6---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 185(3) & 199(5)--- Leave to Appeal was granted by Supreme Court to consider whether writ in the matter could not be issued toPakistan Telecommunication Corporation , Limited, as it was not performing functions in connection with affairs of Government and even if it was assumed to be performing such functions, still subject matter of judgment passed by High Court was not connected with affairs of Government; and whether rules framed by Pakistan Telecommunication Corporation Limited were statuto ry or not.

A reported judgement on restoration of appeal by Supreme Court

2011 SCMR 1535
Art. 185(2)---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XLI, R.19---Appeal , restoration of---Dismissal for non-prosecution-Appeal filed by appellant was dismissed by High Court due to non prosecution and the same was not restored on account of unfair conduct of appellant---Validity---Relief of restoration was dependent upon showing good and sufficient cause of absence of appellant---Supreme Court did not find any exception with the judgment passed by High Court whereby it declined to exercise its discretion in favour of appellant for non-existence of a good cause---Discretion so exercised by High Court was neither arbitrary nor erroneous---Appeal was dismissed.

Contact International Lawyer

If you have any queries related with this post you can contact at internationallawyerinfo@gmail.com

Regards,
Salman Yousaf Khan
Chairperson
International Lawyer
+92-333-5339880