Ch. UMAR HAYAT GONDAL vs RASHID MANZOOR and others
This petition is directed against an ad interim order passed by the Lahore High Court, where the main constitutional petition remains pending. The core legal question concerns the jurisdiction and maintainability of the High Court petition, alongside the right of a party to be impleaded and heard. The Supreme Court disposed of the petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to raise the question of jurisdiction and maintainability directly before the High Court at the time of the hearing, directing that such preliminary issues be addressed before considering the merits of the case. Furthermore, the Court permitted the petitioner to be impleaded as a respondent in the pending proceedings. The key principle laid down is that questions regarding the jurisdiction and maintainability of a matter pending before a high court ought to be raised and addressed at the threshold before the merits of the case are adjudicated upon.
- Can the question of jurisdiction and maintainability be raised before the High Court in a pending petition?
- Whether the High Court is required to address the question of maintainability before deciding a case on its merits?
- Is a party seeking to address the court allowed to be impleaded as a respondent in the pending proceedings?
ORDER
1. ' SAIDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, J.---This petition is directed against the ad interim order of Lahore High Court, dated 10-6-1998. The main petition is still pending in the High Court and we are told by Mr. M.
2. Bilal, the learned counsel for respondent No,1, that the petition is fixed for hearing on 25th of this month. Since the question of jurisdiction of the High Court to entertain the petition is involved, the petitioner is at liberty to raise this question before the High Court at the time of hearing of the petition and if it is so raised, the Court will address the question on maintainability before taking the case on merits. The learned counsel states that his client has not been impleaded as a party. Mr. Bilal states that he has no objection if he is allowed to address the Court as a respondent in that petition. The petitioner is, accordingly, allowed to appear before the High Court and make submission in this regard and he will be deemed to have been impleaded as respondent in the case. With these observations, the petition stands disposed of, accordingly.