Pakistan Case Law
1989 SCMR 326 (2)

NAMDAR ALI SHAH vs ANWAR HUSSAIN SHAH and another

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1989 SCMR 326 (2)
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No, 664 of 1982
Date1988-08-06
Judge(s)Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Dr. Javed Iqbal
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 arose from an interim stay order that had been set aside by the High Court in its constitutional jurisdiction. The core legal question was whether the High Court correctly exercised its writ jurisdiction in setting aside an interim order on the basis of a prima facie finding that the officers who passed the order lacked the requisite jurisdiction. The Supreme Court held that the High Court's interference was justified, as the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the High Court's finding regarding the lack of jurisdiction was erroneous. The Court further observed that it would not grant relief where both parties were attempting to benefit from alleged illegalities. Consequently, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, affirming that the exercise of writ jurisdiction to correct an order passed without jurisdiction does not suffer from legal infirmity. Leave to appeal was refused, establishing the principle that the Supreme Court will decline to intervene where the underlying impugned order is based on a sound prima facie finding of jurisdictional defect.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can the Supreme Court grant relief to a petitioner who is attempting to take advantage of illegalities alongside the opposing party?
  • Does the High Court have the authority to set aside an interim stay order in writ jurisdiction upon a prima facie finding of lack of jurisdiction?
writ jurisdictioninterim stay orderlack of jurisdictionleave to appealconstitutional jurisdiction

ORDER

1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--This petition for leave to appeal has arisen out of an interim stay order.

2. The High Court had set it aside in its Constitutional jurisdiction on prima facie finding that it was passed without jurisdiction. Learned counsel for the petitioner who remained unable to show that the prima facie finding by the High Court that the officers passing the stay order had no jurisdiction in the matter, contended that the respondent No, 1 had also committed some illegalities.

3. After hearing the learned counsel, we find that this Court will not be able to grant any relief to the petitioner on the basis that both the parties are trying to take advantage of the illegalities. The interference by the High Court, in the circumstances of this case, in its writ jurisdiction on the basis of a prima facie finding regarding lack of jurisdiction, does not suffer from any infirmity.

4. ' Leave to appeal is, therefore, refused.

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