Pakistan Case Law
1988 SCMR 450

KHAN WAJID NAWAZ KHAN Versus NASIR KHALIL,

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1988 SCMR 450
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petitions Nos.930 and 931 of 1987
Date1988-01-10
Judge(s)Aslam Riaz Hussain, Javid Iqbal and Saad Saood Jan
Authored bySaad Saood Jan
ResultOrder accordingly
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter concerns two petitions for leave to appeal against interim orders passed by a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, during the pendency of writ petitions arising from decisions of Election Tribunals. The Supreme Court of Pakistan examined the submissions made by the petitioners' counsel regarding the interim nature of the High Court's orders. Upon review, the Court determined that no sufficient grounds existed to warrant its interference at this interlocutory stage. Consequently, the Court declined to grant leave to appeal. However, in the interest of justice and the expeditious resolution of the underlying election disputes, the Supreme Court issued a directive requesting the High Court to dispose of the pending writ petitions during the week commencing from 16-1-1988. The judgment reinforces the principle of judicial restraint regarding interim orders in ongoing proceedings while emphasizing the necessity for timely adjudication in election-related matters.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does the Supreme Court interfere with interim orders passed by the High Court during the pendency of writ petitions?
  • Can the Supreme Court issue directives to the High Court regarding the timeline for disposing of pending petitions?
leave to appealinterim orderselection tribunalswrit jurisdictionexpeditious disposal

ORDER

1. SAAD SAOOD JAN, J. --In these two petitions leave to appeal is being sought from the interim orders of a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, made during the pendency of the writ petitions arising out of the decisions of the Election Tribunals. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, we A do not think that any case for interference by this Court has been made out. The High Court is however requested to dispose of the petitions in the week commencing from 16-1-1988.

2. S.Q./W-16/S. Order accordingly.

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