Latest Judgments

Newly reported judgments from the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the High Courts and tribunals, added as they are processed — free, full text, updated daily. Judgments marked NEW were added in the most recent update. 232594 judgments in total.

• Syed TAJAMMUL MAHMUD Versus1981 PLC(CS) 127 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1980-11-24
  compulsory retirementservice appeallimitation periodcondonation of delayappellate authoritypersonal hearingvoid order
  Summary & questions settled

  This petition for leave to appeal challenged a Service Tribunal judgment that dismissed the petitioner's appeal against his compulsory retirement as time-barred. The petitioner had been compulsorily retired in 1971. A 1975 Service Tribunal order set aside the appellate dismissal of his appeal on procedural grounds—specifically, the lack of a personal hearing—and remanded the matter. The Finance Secretary subsequently scheduled a personal hearing, which the petitioner refused to attend, arguing the appeal was no longer pending. Following the Finance Secretary's rejection of his appeal in 1976, the petitioner filed numerous representations to various authorities instead of appealing to the Service Tribunal, resulting in a two-year delay. The Supreme Court held that the Service Tribunal's 1975 order did not invalidate the original retirement order but merely required the appellate authority to rehear the appeal properly. Consequently, the Finance Secretary acted within jurisdiction. The Court affirmed that the petitioner's failure to file a timely appeal to the Service Tribunal, opting instead for futile representations, rendered his appeal time-barred. No question of law warranting interference under Article 212 of the Constitution was found.

  Questions settled

  • Does a Service Tribunal order setting aside an appellate decision for lack of personal hearing invalidate the original disciplinary order?
  • Does the time spent pursuing representations to various authorities constitute sufficient cause for condoning delay in filing a service appeal?
  • Is an appellate authority acting without jurisdiction when it rehears an appeal following a remand order from a Service Tribunal?
  Read full judgment →
• ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN Versus1981 PLC(CS) 125 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1980-10-07
  service tribunalcompulsory retirementmisconductinquiry officerefficiency and discipline rulesex-parte inquiry
  Summary & questions settled

  This petition for special leave to appeal arises from an order of the Service Tribunal setting aside the compulsory retirement of the respondent and directing his reinstatement with consequential benefits. The respondent had been proceeded against for alleged misconduct, inefficiency, and negligence under the Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1960. Although an inquiry officer was appointed, no formal inquiry was conducted because the respondent failed to submit a written defence or join the proceedings. The core legal question was whether the authorities could dispense with a formal inquiry upon the accused government servant's failure to participate. The Supreme Court held that notwithstanding the respondent's failure to respond, rule 8 of the Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1960, makes it incumbent upon the Inquiry Officer to proceed and complete the inquiry in the absence of the accused to establish the allegations. The petition was accordingly dismissed.

  Questions settled

  • Whether an inquiry officer is legally required to complete an inquiry ex-parte when a government servant fails to submit a written defence or join the proceedings?
  • Can a penalty of compulsory retirement be sustained in the absence of a completed inquiry under the Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1960?
  Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD SADIQ KHOKHAR Versus1981 PLC(CS) 123 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1976-11-03
  civil servicedouble jeopardyreinstatementsuspensionjurisdictionService Tribunalwrit petition
  Summary & questions settled

  This leave petition arose from a High Court judgment dismissing the petitioner's writ petition in limine. The petitioner, a civil servant, was initially removed from service following an inquiry, but was reinstated after his appeal to the Service Tribunal because the removal order was issued by an authority lower in rank than his appointing authority. Upon reinstatement, he was immediately suspended and served with a fresh memorandum of charges by the proper appointing authority. The petitioner challenged this second inquiry in the High Court, arguing double jeopardy and asserting that the High Court had jurisdiction under Article 199 because no 'final order' had yet been passed to trigger the Service Tribunal's jurisdiction. The Supreme Court held that the second inquiry did not constitute double jeopardy as the initial order was void for lack of competent authority. Furthermore, the suspension order had attained finality, and because the grievance related to the terms and conditions of service, the Service Tribunal held exclusive jurisdiction under Article 212(2) of the Constitution, which overrides Article 199.

  Questions settled

  • Does a second disciplinary inquiry on the same charges constitute double jeopardy if the first removal order was set aside because it was passed by an incompetent authority?
  • Does the High Court have jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 over matters relating to the terms and conditions of service of a civil servant when a Service Tribunal has been established?
  • Can an order of suspension be considered a final order for the purpose of invoking the jurisdiction of the Service Tribunal under the Service Tribunals Act 1973?
  Read full judgment →
• Haji SARDAR MUHAMMAD Versus1981 PLC(CS) 121 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1980-06-17
  compulsory retirementlacheswrit jurisdictionpublic interestmala fidescivil servicereview petition
  Summary & questions settled

  This petition for leave to appeal challenged a Peshawar High Court judgment that dismissed a constitution petition regarding the compulsory retirement of a government servant. The petitioner, a former Section Officer, sought to challenge his retirement, which took effect in 1976, after a subsequent review petition under Martial Law Order 23 was rejected in 1978. The core legal questions concerned whether the High Court correctly dismissed the petition on the grounds of laches and whether the retirement order was vitiated by the absence of the specific phrase 'public interest' or allegations of mala fides. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, holding that the High Court exercised its discretion appropriately regarding laches, given the significant delays in filing. Furthermore, the Court affirmed that the mere omission of the specific words 'public interest' in a retirement notification does not invalidate the order if the action was otherwise lawful under the relevant statute. The judgment establishes that discretionary dismissal on the basis of laches is a matter for the High Court's judgment based on the specific circumstances of each case.

  Questions settled

  • Does the omission of the phrase 'public interest' in a notification of compulsory retirement invalidate the order?
  • Is the High Court's dismissal of a petition on the grounds of laches a matter of judicial discretion?
  • Can a petitioner claim discrimination based on the fact that other Benches of the High Court took a different view on the issue of laches in similar cases?
  Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD ASHRAF Versus1981 PLC(CS) 120 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1980-12-06
  compulsory retirementservice lawlimitation periodadverse entriesservice tribunalinefficiencydepartmental appeal
  Summary & questions settled

  This petition for leave to appeal challenges an order of the Federal Service Tribunal, which dismissed the petitioner's appeal against his compulsory retirement from service on grounds of limitation and merits. The core legal questions were whether the petitioner's appeal before the Tribunal was time-barred and whether the compulsory retirement was justified based on the petitioner's service record. The Supreme Court held that the appeal was indeed time-barred, as it was filed beyond the 90-day period prescribed by the Service Tribunals Act, 1973, following the establishment of the Tribunal. The Court further affirmed the Tribunal's finding on merits, noting that the petitioner's service record contained adverse entries that justified the competent authority's decision to compulsorily retire him for inefficiency. The key principle laid down is that departmental appeals not provided for under relevant service rules do not extend the limitation period for filing an appeal before a Service Tribunal, and that adverse entries in a service record constitute a valid basis for compulsory retirement by the competent authority.

  Questions settled

  • Does a departmental appeal not provided for under relevant service rules extend the limitation period for filing an appeal before a Service Tribunal?
  • Is an appeal filed after the 90-day period from the establishment of the Service Tribunal liable to be rejected as time-barred?
  • Can adverse entries in a service record justify an order of compulsory retirement for inefficiency?
  Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD ASLAM KHAN Versus1981 PLC(CS) 117 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1980-04-30Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD ISMAIL Versus1981 PLC(CS) 115 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1979-05-12
  civil servantsenioritypromotionjurisdiction of civil courtservice tribunalterms and conditions of service
  Summary & questions settled

  This is a petition for special leave to appeal from a revisional order of the Lahore High Court arising out of a civil suit filed by the petitioner, a Research Assistant, seeking a declaration of seniority over other employees and an order for retrospective promotion in the Directorate Land Reclamation, Government of Punjab. The trial court decreed the suit, but the lower appellate court and the High Court dismissed it on the ground that matters of seniority and promotion pertain to the terms and conditions of service, falling within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Service Tribunal under the Punjab Service Tribunals Act and Article 212 of the Constitution, thereby barring the jurisdiction of civil courts. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that civil courts lack jurisdiction to entertain service disputes regarding seniority and promotion of civil servants when an Administrative Tribunal has been established for that purpose.

  Questions settled

  • Does a civil court have jurisdiction to entertain a suit filed by a civil servant relating to seniority and promotion?
  • Are matters of seniority and promotion included in the terms and conditions of service of a civil servant?
  • Does Article 212 of the Constitution bar the jurisdiction of other courts in respect of matters to which the jurisdiction of an Administrative Court or Tribunal extends?
  Read full judgment →
• UNIVERSITY OF PESHAWAR Versus ZULQARNAIN1981 PLC(CS) 114 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1980-09-30
  service appealalternate remedywrit petitionuniversity employeereversiontermination of service
  Summary & questions settled

  This civil appeal arises from a judgment of the Peshawar High Court regarding the reversion of a civil engineer and the termination of another's services by the University of Peshawar following an adverse inquiry report regarding construction work. The core legal question concerns the maintainability of a constitutional writ petition in the presence of an adequate alternate remedy by way of an appeal. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that an alternate remedy by way of an appeal was competent under the statute. The key principle laid down is that where an alternate statutory remedy of appeal is available, a constitutional petition under the relevant constitutional jurisdiction is ordinarily not maintainable unless special circumstances are made out, though parties may be granted liberty to pursue the alternate remedy.

  Questions settled

  • Is an appeal competent under section 39 of the University of Peshawar Act 1974 against an order of the University Syndicate?
  • Does the availability of an alternate remedy under the statute bar the entertaining of a writ petition?
  Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD ISMAIL Versus1981 PLC(CS) 112 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1980-11-24
  service lawlimitation periodservice tribunaldepartmental appealtime-barred appealdisciplinary proceedings
  Summary & questions settled

  This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against an order of the Central Service Tribunal, which dismissed the petitioner's appeal as time-barred. The petitioner, an Assistant Foreman, challenged departmental disciplinary actions taken against him in 1976. After his departmental appeal was dismissed on 16-7-1978, the petitioner filed multiple representations to the President instead of approaching the Service Tribunal. He subsequently filed an appeal before the Service Tribunal in 1980, relying on the date his last representation was withheld to calculate the limitation period. The core legal question was whether the time spent on unauthorized representations to the President could be excluded from the statutory limitation period for filing an appeal before the Service Tribunal. The Supreme Court held that the law does not permit the exclusion of time spent on repeated representations after a final departmental order. The Court affirmed that the appeal was filed nearly two years after the final departmental order and was therefore hopelessly time-barred. The petition was dismissed, upholding the Tribunal's decision.

  Questions settled

  • Can the time spent on making repeated representations to the President be excluded from the limitation period for filing an appeal before the Service Tribunal?
  • Does the filing of representations to the President after the dismissal of a departmental appeal extend the statutory limitation period under the Central Service Tribunals Act 1973?
  Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD MUNAWAR KHAN Versus1981 PLC(CS) 108 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1980-11-12Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD AKHTAR Versus1981 PLC(CS) 106 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1980-05-20Read full judgment →
• PUNJAB ROAD TRANSPORT BOARD Versus PUNJAB SERVICE TRIBUNAL LAHORE, ETC.1981 PLC(CS) 105 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1980-04-27Read full judgment →
• FAZAL AHMAD Versus1981 PLC(CS) 103 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1980-10-01
  service appeallimitationcondonation of delayabatement of suitServices Tribunal
  Summary & questions settled

  This appeal by special leave is directed against the order of the Services Tribunal dismissing the appellant's service appeal on the ground of limitation. The core legal question concerns whether the Services Tribunal erred in law by refusing to condone the delay in filing the appeal after the appellant's civil suit abated upon the promulgation of the Services Tribunals Act 1973. The Supreme Court held that the civil suit abated ipso facto by operation of law upon the establishment of the Tribunal, requiring no formal declaration by the civil court, and that the appellant failed to plead or substantiate that the delay was caused by the mistaken advice of counsel. The Court concluded that the appeal was rightly dismissed as time-barred, establishing that statutory abatement occurs automatically and a party cannot claim the benefit of mistaken counsel advice without pleading it.

  Questions settled

  • Does a civil suit regarding service matters abate ipso facto upon the establishment of the Services Tribunal under the Services Tribunals Act 1973?
  • Can an appellant claim the benefit of mistaken advice of counsel for condonation of delay when such a ground was not pleaded in the application before the Services Tribunal?
  Read full judgment →
• Ch. MUHAMMAD ASLAM Versus SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB, HOME DEPARTMENT1980 PLC(CS) 399 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1980-02-11Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD SIRAJ Versus PAKISTAN1980 PLC(CS) 398 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1980-01-29
  review petitionremoval from servicedelegation of powerscivil servanterror apparent on the face of the record
  Summary & questions settled

  This matter arises from a review petition filed against the previous judgment of the Supreme Court dated 26th March, 1978, which had dismissed the petitioner's leave petition challenging his removal from service. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioner's removal by the Director, Malaria Institute of Pakistan, Dacca, was illegal due to an alleged unlawful sub-delegation of powers originating from the President of Pakistan. The Supreme Court held that the review petition is not maintainable as it merely attempts to re-argue the case on points already considered and rejected, without pointing out any error patent on the face of the record. The court laid down the principle that a review petition cannot be used to re-litigate issues previously examined and decided, absent an error apparent on the face of the record.

  Questions settled

  • Can a review petition be entertained to re-argue a case on points already urged and rejected?
  • What constitutes a valid ground for the review of a judgment of the Supreme Court?
  Read full judgment →
• ALLAH RAKHA Versus GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB1980 PLC(CS) 397 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1980-02-25Read full judgment →
• THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT Versus MUNAWAR ALI1980 PLC(CS) 393 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1980-03-19Read full judgment →
• WAHIDUDDIN Versus PROVINCE OF SIND1980 PLC(CS) 390 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 1980-01-28
  service tribunaltermination of serviceprobationermisconduct inquirysummoning of recordinitial appointmentsubstantial question of law of public importance
  Summary & questions settled

  The petitioner, a Civil Judge appointed on a regular basis after selection by the Public Service Commission, had his services terminated under section 11 of the Sind Civil Servants Act, 1973 while serving as a probationer. He appealed to the Sind Service Appellate Tribunal, arguing that his termination was a punitive removal for alleged misconduct without an inquiry, and contended that the Tribunal erred in refusing to summon the official record. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, holding that the termination was a simple discharge of a probationer. Upon a petition for special leave to appeal, the Supreme Court of Pakistan held that the petitioner was indeed a probationer under initial appointment, that the termination was a simple discharge not requiring a show-cause notice or inquiry, and that the Tribunal's discretionary power to summon documents under section 5(2)(b) of the Sind Service Tribunals Act, 1973 could not be interfered with, particularly as the matter did not involve a substantial question of law of public importance under Article 212 of the Constitution. The petition was accordingly dismissed.

  Questions settled

  • Whether the termination of a probationer's service under section 11 of the Sind Civil Servants Act, 1973 requires a show-cause notice or an inquiry where no misconduct is apparent on the face of the order?
  • Does the refusal of the Service Tribunal to summon record under section 5(2)(b) of the Sind Service Tribunals Act, 1973 give rise to a substantial question of law of public importance under Article 212 of the Constitution?
  • What constitutes an initial appointment under section 2(1)(d) of the Sind Civil Servants Act, 1973?
  Read full judgment →
• WASEEMA ANAYAT Versus ABIDA BIBI2025 PLC(CS) 999 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2025-01-14Read full judgment →
• SAIMA MIR ZAMAN Versus AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION2025 PLC(CS) 911 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2024-11-22Read full judgment →
• ZOBIA BEGUM Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT2025 PLC(CS) 895 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2025-02-17Read full judgment →
• AZAD GOVERNMENT Versus Kh. SHOUKAT ABDULLLAH2025 PLC(CS) 886 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2025-01-28Read full judgment →
• GHAZANFAR ALI Versus VICE-CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR2025 PLC(CS) 606 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2024-10-01Read full judgment →
• SHEHROZE RAHEEM MUGHAL Versus PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION2025 PLC(CS) 1663 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2024-12-24Read full judgment →
• SALMA KHATOON Versus PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION through Chairman2025 PLC(CS) 1068 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2024-10-14Read full judgment →
• SABEEL KHAN Versus MUHAMMAD LATIF KHAN2025 PLC(CS) 1061 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2024-10-14Read full judgment →
• NUSRAT SHAHEEN Versus SECRETARY SOCIAL WELFARE AND WOMEN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, MUZAFFARABAD2025 PLC(CS) 1046 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2024-10-11Read full judgment →
• RIFFAT SHAHEEN Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT through Secretary Elementary and Secondary School Education of the State of Jammu and Kashmir2021 PLC(CS) 1380 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2020-08-13Read full judgment →
• AYESHA NAZIR Versus ABIDA GHUFAR2020 PLC(CS) 810 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2019-04-03Read full judgment →
• FINANCE DEPARTMENT, AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR, through Secretary Finance, Civil Secretariat, Chatter Domail, Muzaffarabad Versus MAHBOOB AHMED AWAN2020 PLC(CS) 741 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2019-04-09Read full judgment →
• ZAFFAR IQBAL KHAN ECG TECHNICIAN CMH, RAWALAKOT Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR2019 PLC(CS) 995 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2018-10-05Read full judgment →
• COMPETENT AUTHORITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE SUBORDINATE JUDICIARY Versus RASHID IFTIKHAR HASHMI2019 PLC(CS) 733 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2018-04-23Read full judgment →
• NASEEB AZAD Versus CHAIRMAN EHTESAB BUREAU OF THE STATE OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR2019 PLC(CS) 579 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2018-05-11Read full judgment →
• ZULFIQAR AZAM Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary, Muzaffarabad2019 PLC(CS) 155 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2017-04-28Read full judgment →
• SHOUKAT ALI MUGHAL Versus SECRETARY SERVICES AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT MUZAFFARABAD2018 PLC(CS) 1129 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2018-01-29Read full judgment →
• AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR Versus MUHAMMAD QADIR JAVID2014 PLC(CS) 1334 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2014-02-24Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD JAVAID Versus SECRETARY HOME2004 PLC(CS) 835 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1999-11-11Read full judgment →
• IQBAL AHMAD SHAH Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT2003 PLC(CS) 439 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2002-03-21Read full judgment →
• INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE, AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARABAD Versus GHULAM MUSTAFA2003 PLC(CS) 1 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2002-06-07Read full judgment →
• TANVEER AHMAD Versus ROSHAN DIN2001 PLC(CS) 256 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2000-03-12Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE Versus MUHAMMAD SHAFI DAR2001 PLC(CS) 202 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1999-05-05Read full judgment →
• Versus Haji Muhammad Ashraf , Raja Muhammad Hanif Khan1999 PLC(CS) 460 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1996-05-22Read full judgment →
• ALTAF HUSSAIN BUKHARI Versus ACCOUNTANT-GENERAL, AZAD JAMMU ANDKASHMIR1999 PLC(CS) 1485 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1999-01-26Read full judgment →
• ABDUL HAMID Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR1997 PLC(CS) 805 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1997-05-02Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD SALCEM CHUGHTAI Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR1997 PLC(CS) 642 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1996-11-19Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD ASLANT Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARABAD1997 PLC(CS) 640 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1996-11-21Read full judgment →
• ABDUR RASHID QURESHI, ASSISTANT ENGINEER, P.W.D. MUZAFFARABAD Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR1997 PLC(CS) 505 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1995-12-10Read full judgment →
• SHABIR AHMED Versus AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT1997 PLC(CS) 478 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1996-12-17Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD ASHRAF KHAN KAYANI Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR1997 PLC(CS) 376 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1996-06-17Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD AJAIB Versus PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR1997 PLC(CS) 222 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1996-09-21Read full judgment →
• AZMAT HUSSAIN GARDEZI Versus SECRETARY, INDUSTRY/PRINTING AND STATIONERY DEPARTMENT, AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR1995 PLC(CS) 613 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1994-12-19Read full judgment →
• AFTAB AHMED KHAN Versus DIRECTOR, HEALTH SERVICES, AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARABAD1994 PLC(CS) 566 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1993-12-09Read full judgment →
• ALI ASHRAF SHAH GILLANI Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR1994 PLC(CS) 263 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1992-08-31Read full judgment →
• 1994 PLC(CS) 15141994 PLC(CS) 1514 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1994-05-18Read full judgment →
• ABDUL GHANI Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT STATE OF JAMMU ANDKASHMIR1994 PLC(CS) 1388 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1994-02-16Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD ASGHAR KHAN Versus COMMISSIONER, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARABAD1994 PLC(CS) 115 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1993-03-01Read full judgment →
• FA. TAHIR Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR1993 PLC(CS) 994 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1992-09-27Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD YAQOOB Versus SECRTARY,JAILS AND 3 OTHERS1993 PLC(CS) 990 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1992-09-21Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD BASHIR KHAN Versus INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE, MUZAFFARABAD , Raja Muhammad Hanif Khan1993 PLC(CS) 986 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1993-03-02Read full judgment →
• MASUD HAIDER KIANI Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF J&K1993 PLC(CS) 783 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1993-04-15Read full judgment →
• GHULAM JALLANI Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR1993 PLC(CS) 71 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1992-03-26Read full judgment →
• JAMIL AKHTER SHERAZI Versus AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT1993 PLC(CS) 637 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1992-10-10Read full judgment →
• FAZAL-UR-REHMAN ABBASI Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR1993 PLC(CS) 633 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1992-08-31Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD LATIF KHAN Versus ALIUL HUSSAIN BUKHARI, D.C.F., MUZAFFARABAD1993 PLC(CS) 297 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1992-10-06Read full judgment →
• AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF J&K Versus MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE KHAN1993 PLC(CS) 286 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1992-11-16Read full judgment →
• ACCOUNTANT-GENERAL, AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARABAD Versus ZAMAN HUSSAIN KHAN1993 PLC(CS) 268 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1992-11-02Read full judgment →
• IMTIAZ HUSSAIN KAZAMI Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR , Sardar Rafique Mahmood1993 PLC(CS) 1687 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1993-01-06Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD AZIZ KHAN Versus SECRETARY, FOOD DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARABAD1993 PLC(CS) 1681 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1993-02-06Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD FAROOQ AHMAD Versus AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT , Farooq Hussain Kashmiri1993 PLC(CS) 1676 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1993-01-14Read full judgment →
• ABDUR RASHID KHAN Versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT, MUZAFFARABAD1993 PLC(CS) 1672 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1993-01-03Read full judgment →
• ARSHAD MAHBOOB Versus AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT , Syed Nazir Hussain Shah & Farooq Hussain Kashmiri1993 PLC(CS) 1665 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1993-01-12Read full judgment →
• AFTAB HUSSAIN SHAH GARDAIZI Versus AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT , Farooq Hussain Kashmiri & Raja Muhammad Hanif Khan1993 PLC(CS) 1659 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1992-12-31Read full judgment →
• REHMAT ALI AITMAD Versus SECRETARY, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT, MUZAFFARABAD , Kh. Abdus Samad & Syed Nazir Hussain Shah1993 PLC(CS) 1656 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1993-03-03Read full judgment →
• JAMILA BEGUM Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR , M. Tabassum Aftab Alvi1993 PLC(CS) 162 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1992-04-23Read full judgment →
• SKEENA BEBI Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR1993 PLC(CS) 159 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1992-01-16Read full judgment →
• 1993 PLC(CS) 15781993 PLC(CS) 1578 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and KashmirRead full judgment →
• AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF J&K Versus PRVAIZ KHAN1993 PLC(CS) 1575 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1993-08-03Read full judgment →
• 1993 PLC(CS) 15651993 PLC(CS) 1565 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and KashmirRead full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD RASHID Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR1993 PLC(CS) 153 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and KashmirRead full judgment →
• JAMAL DIN Versus AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT1993 PLC(CS) 1375 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1992-08-06Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD RASHID CHOUDHRY Versus CHAIRMAN, AKLASC, MUZAFFARABAD1993 PLC(CS) 1201 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1993-04-28Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD SHAHPAL QADRI Versus A.K. GOVERNMENT COOPERATIVE BANK LTD., MUZAFFARABAD1993 PLC(CS) 1161 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1993-04-28Read full judgment →
• MUNIR HUSSAIN SHAH Versus SECRETARY, FORESTS DEPARTMENT, AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZATLARABAD1993 PLC(CS) 1153 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1993-05-16Read full judgment →
• SHIREEN DIL KHAN NIAZI Versus SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE1993 PLC(CS) 1124 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and KashmirRead full judgment →
• MUSHTAQ AHMAD GARDEZI, DISTRICT HEALTH OFFICER, POONCH Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR1993 PLC(CS) 1052 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1992-06-15Read full judgment →
• Agha GHULAM HUSSAIN Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR1987 PLC(CS) 450 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1986-07-29Read full judgment →
• 1987 PLC(CS) 4191987 PLC(CS) 419 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and KashmirRead full judgment →
• 1987 PLC(CS) 3351987 PLC(CS) 335 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and KashmirRead full judgment →
• 1987 PLC(CS) 3021987 PLC(CS) 302 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1986-11-23Read full judgment →
• 1987 PLC(CS) 2771987 PLC(CS) 277 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and KashmirRead full judgment →
• HANIF AKHTAR RANJA AND 2 OTHERS Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE of JAMMU AND KASHMIR1983 PLC(CS) 932 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1983-06-18Read full judgment →
• IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN ABBAS-I Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR1983 PLC(CS) 586 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1983-02-03Read full judgment →
• AZIZ-UR-REHMAN Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND ANOTHER1983 PLC(CS) 50 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1982-07-11Read full judgment →
• FIDA MUHAMMAD RATHORE Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT1983 PLC(CS) 256 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1982-11-08Read full judgment →
• 1981 PLC(CS) 971981 PLC(CS) 97 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1980-11-05Read full judgment →
• Ch. MUHAMMAD LATIF Versus1981 PLC(CS) 82 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1980-09-15Read full judgment →
• 1981 PLC(CS) 5441981 PLC(CS) 544 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and KashmirRead full judgment →
• ISLAM MUHAMMAD Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF J & K1981 PLC(CS) 313 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and KashmirRead full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD ZULF KHAN Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR1981 PLC(CS) 26 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 1980-09-30Read full judgment →
• MUHAMMAD TAJ Versus1981 PLC(CS) 210 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and KashmirRead full judgment →