MUHAMMAD AZHAR SIDDIQUE versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY, LAHORE
Arts 199, 210 (6), 213, 215 and 218 () Judicial Review Scope Chief Election Commissioner's actions disallow any action by a constitutional official of the State Border to attract constitutional jurisdictional arguments in Pakistan. Does not recognize The review can be based on a variety of relevant criteria, but complete exclusion from judicial review is a misnomer, but in any case the constitutional clause to exclude the jurisdiction of the superior courts can be stringent, there are three criteria on which the high court always May have jurisdiction to review. Any action by a constitutional officer where the proceedings under question are terminated by any jurisdiction, without any jurisdiction or, to some extent unfair, a High Court examining such action. And it has the jurisdiction to examine the validity that top constitutional officials cannot be held accountable for their implicit decisions. It is merely a test of the existence of synonymy in the discharge of their constitutional functions, the application of the NT material and the mind that can be applied to assess the authenticity of their arbitrary ruling, thus allowing the courts to consider the subjective element of an arbitrary decision. Avoiding neglect, but considering its constituents, it can consider its authenticity to justify the constitutionally protected proceedings of Touchstone on the report of Ghulam Mustafa Khar's case as PLD 1989. The Supreme Court recognized that such standards represent an arbitrary order passed by the sovereign high constitution. The Chief Election Commissioner is not exempt from judicial review in any case.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
