Find a Lawyer

IN RE: SUO MOTU CRIMINAL ORIGINAL NO. 1 OF 2001 versus IN RE: SUO MOTU CRIMINAL ORIGINAL NO. 1 OF 2001

The 31st and 36th Court of Commissioners, excluding a petition for revision under Section 36 of the Capital Arts Authority Ordinance, 1960; Constitution Pakistan 1973 Arts 204 and 189 Capital Development Authority Ordinance (XXIII of 1960), 30; , The Capital Development Authority, disagreed with its decision on the section 2 (KK) interpretation presented by the High Court and the Supreme Court. ), Sardar Begum and others v. Capital Development Authority and others PLD 1977 LA 1200 and Muhammad Yunus and others v. Capital Development Authority and other PLD 1976 SC 752 in the decisions referred to in the 30 and 31 Intermediate Languages of the Ordinance. Was declared compulsory. Although the Commissioner did not enjoy judicial powers to execute the decision in accordance with the letter and spirit pursuant to Article 189 of the Constitution, he was required to make a judicial decision in the pre-judicial proceedings. Were responsible for The decisions of the High Courts are as if they are acting as a judicial forum with powers, to the extent of the decisions of the Court that are properly commissioned by them, therefore, they have no lawful right to Unlike the law stated in the reported decisions and not acting, he blamed himself for contempt of court. The court case because they used international language while agreeing to the principles laid down in it, the respondent apologized for his actions and at the mercy of the judicial follower of the order passed by the Commissioner in 1983. There was, however, a hint that he had come to terms with his earlier intentions ask a advocate free from Qazi Ahmed lawyer