KARAKORAM INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY THROUGH VICE-CHANCELLOR, GILGIT versus FIDA HUSSAIN
Article 71 (2) (a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Annoyed by the written request, the person opted for the right of the post, in response to an advertisement in the newspaper, applied for the post in question. Went and failed the selection process. The Chief Court directed the officials to exercise their jurisdiction on the writ so that the destiny of the respondents against the vacant posts could be justified. Whatever was gathered in favor of the respondents, there was no right of violation. No question arises when the individual can only be called aggravated when he or she is legally denied. By someone who has a legal obligation to exercise that right, the court may extend its jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition when there was not only one right but also the right to justice, either personally or Otherwise no order could be passed under Article 199 of the Constitution. Pakistan, 1973, on the basis of respondents only on recommendations or shortlisting, because the respondents have no legal or jurisdictional right to be appointed as a supplementary assessment, it falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of appointment. He, who could not be compelled to make any appointment to serve Plato, even though he was charged, could not be provided with any credible and convincing evidence. Court allows appeal to set aside the judgment passed by the Chief Court to meet the end of justice
Related judgments — Supreme Appelate Court Gilgit, 2010
