Pakistan Case Law
2007 PLD Supreme Court 79

Messrs AL-MAHMUDIA (PVT.) LTD. vs PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Works, Islamabad and others

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2007 PLD Supreme Court 79
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No,788 of 2006
Date2006-09-14
Judge(s)Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, C.J., Abdul Hameed Dogar and Saiyed Saeed Ashhad
Authored byIftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry
ResultPetition dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This petition for leave to appeal was filed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, which had declined to interfere with an administrative order. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether a hearing before a Section Officer satisfies the requirements of natural justice and the statutory provisions of Article 32 of the President's Order (1) of 1983. The petitioner, relying on a subsequent judgment, argued that they were entitled to a hearing before the competent authority rather than a Section Officer. The Supreme Court, however, examined the conflicting precedents and reaffirmed the principle established by a larger Bench in the case of Federation of Pakistan v. Muhammad Tariq Prizada and 2 others (1999 SCMR 2744). The Court held that a hearing before a Section Officer is legally sufficient to meet the requirements of the relevant Order. Consequently, the Supreme Court approved the earlier view taken in the Tariq Prizada case, dismissed the petition, and declined to grant leave to appeal, upholding the High Court's decision to not interfere with the impugned order.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does a hearing before a Section Officer satisfy the requirements of Article 32 of the President's Order (1) of 1983?
  • Is a hearing before a Section Officer sufficient to meet the requirements of natural justice in administrative proceedings?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Article 32, President's Order (1) of 1983
administrative lawnatural justiceright to hearingcompetent authoritySection Officerprecedentleave to appeal

ORDER

' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J.---This petition has been filed against the judgment dated 5- 6-2006 passed by Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench.

2. Learned counsel stated that in view of the judgment in the case of Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Education v. Pr. Dr. Anwar and 2 others 2006 SCM R 382 the petitioner is entitled for hearing before the competent authority by way of submitting his reply. In this behalf it may be noted that a larger Bench of this Court earlier delivered a judgment in the case of Federation of Pakistan v. Muhammad Tariq Prizada and 2 others 1999 SCM R 2744 and settled that hearing before Section Officer is sufficient. Relying upon the same judgment, learned High Court had observed that hearing before Section Officer will meet the requirements of Article 32 Order PO(1) 1983.

2-A. We are inclined to agree with the judgment delivered by a larger Bench comparing the judgment which has been relied upon by the learned counsel, therefore, the earlier view taken in Tariq Pirzada's case (ibid) is approved and petition is dismissed holding that the High Court had rightly declined to interfere in the impugned order following the law laid down in the judgment delivered by a larger Bench of this Court.

' Petition is dismissed and leave declined.

Cited by 10 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.