Find a Lawyer

ABDUL SATTAR CHUGHTAI MALIK versus PAKISTAN BAR COUNCIL THROUGH SECRETARY

Sections 55 and 56 of the Supreme Court Bar Association Rules, 8, 9, 12 and 43 of the Law Reform Ordinance (XII of 1972), the Section 3 intra-court appeal went beyond the order of the single judge in the constitution petition, appeal to the constitution The original complaint of the petitioner was that it was not in the interest of the Association to extend the terms of the Executive Committee of the Office Beers and the Supreme Court Bar Association from two years to one year. That the elected officials were not in a position to achieve their goal for which they had chosen. And the one-year term for the Supreme Court Bar Association was ridiculously short and lacked to pay its obligations to achieve its goal, against which the appellant's arguments were opposed to the single judge. It said that rules 8, 9 and 12 of the Supreme Court Bar have been amended. The rules of the Association were in the best interest of all members of the Association who represented all the four provinces of Pakistan who were elected by one of the elected representatives of the Supreme Court Bar Association or any member of the Bar in this case. Was not supported, the appellant was opposed to the competitor. No power, unless the rules are in accordance with the law, no violation of the constitution, rules or rules shall attract the jurisdiction of the Constitution, the Supreme Court Bar Association an organization under Article 199 of the Constitution. , Was an organization of lawyers who deserved it. Exercises in the Supreme Court, which were not constituted under any Act of Parliament, but which have illicit legality, are the rules or rules set by this body which will be unconstitutional and when you need a advocate from Kundina lawyer