AKHTAR HUSSAIN and 4 others vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a series of petitions brought before the Supreme Court of Pakistan regarding the constitutional validity of the repromulgation of Ordinances. The core legal question presented for the Court's consideration is whether the President of Pakistan possesses the authority under Article 89 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 to repromulgate an Ordinance that has already stood repealed by operation of law under clause (2) of the same Article. The judgment highlights a significant conflict in judicial interpretation, noting that while the Sindh High Court aligned with the precedent established in Maulvi Tamizuddin Ahmad v. Province of East Bengal, the Lahore High Court adopted a contrary position in Rehmat Khan v. Federation of Pakistan. Recognizing that the issue involves a matter of general legal importance requiring an authoritative interpretation of constitutional provisions, the Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to resolve the conflicting views held by the High Courts. The Court did not issue a final ruling on the merits in this order but formally acknowledged the necessity of settling this constitutional controversy.
- Does the President have the power under Article 89 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 to repromulgate an Ordinance that has already stood repealed under clause (2) of Article 89?
- Article 89, Constitution of Pakistan 1973
- Article 89(2), Constitution of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
' SALEEM AKHTAR, J.---The question for consideration in these petitions is as follows:-- "Whether the President has power under Article 89 of the Constitution to repromulgate an Ordinance which stood repealed in terms of clause (2) of Article 89 of the Constitution?"
' In support of the proposition that no such power exists, reference can be made to Maulvi Tamizuddin Ahmad v. Province of East Bengal (PLD 1949 Dacca 1) and D.C., Wadhwa and others v.
State of Bihar and others (AIR 1987 SC 579).
2. A contrary view has also been expressed in a recent Full Bench judgment of the Lahore High Court in Rehmat Khan v. Federation of Pakistan etc. (PLD 1993 Lah. 70).
3. The High Court of Sindh in Shariat Petitions followed the view expressed in Maulvi Tamizuddin Ahmad's case. The Federation of Pakistan has filed Civil Appeals Nos.80, 81, 83, 85, 87, 89, 91, 92 and 98-K of 1991, which are pending. As there are conflicting views expressed by the two High Courts and the question involved is of general legal importance and further requires authoritative interpretation of the provision of the Constitution, leave is granted to consider the aforesaid question.