IMRAN RAHIM DURRANI vs PROVINCE OF BALOCHISTAN through Chief Secretary Civil Secretariate, Quetta art — 2022 PLC(CS) 1192 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Citation: 2022 PLC(CS) 1192 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN
Court: Balochistan High Court
Year: 2022
Reporter: PLC
Parties: IMRAN RAHIM DURRANI vs PROVINCE OF BALOCHISTAN through Chief Secretary Civil Secretariate, Quetta art
Subject matter: Constitutional

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

IMRAN RAHIM DURRANI VS PROVINCE OF BALOCHISTAN through Chief Secretary Civil Secretariate, Quetta art.199---Constitutional petition---Maintainability---Scope---Petitioners were Employees of Irrigation Department---"aggrieved person"---Scope---Construction of dams by Public Health Engineering Department---Contention of petitioners was that construction of dams was exclusive domain of Irrigation Department---Validity---Petitioners invoking constitutional jurisdiction had to establish that their legal or fundamental rights had been violated and they were "aggrieved persons"---Petitioners had to prove their locus standi to seek direction for initiation of action against the respondents---Petitioners were employees of Irrigation Department and they could not challenge way of business being carried out by the Government's competent functionaries---Public Sector Development Program had to be approved by the Cabinet and then sent to the assembly and after passing of the budget the work of said program would be reflected in the budget---Construction of dam by Public Health Engineering Department had been approved by the Cabinet as well as by the assembly---Secretary Irrigation Department had not challenged the decision of construction of dam made by the Government for assigning said construction to Public Health Engineering Department---Petitioners being employees of Irrigation Department did not fall within the definition of 'aggrieved person'---Petitioners could not be termed to be 'aggrieved persons' for challenging orders, acts or proceedings done by the respondent department---Constitutional petition being not maintainable was dismissed, in circumstances. Head NotesCase Description

Other judgments reported in 2022 PLC

2022 PLC 62 SUPREME-COURTDIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, QUETTA POSTAL DIVISION VS MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM S. 25(1)--- Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ord…
2022 PLC 62 SUPREME-COURTDIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, QUETTA POSTAL DIVISION VS MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM S. 2(1)(b)(iii)---Industrial Relations Act (X of 2012), S. 2(xxxiii)--…
2022 PLC(CS) 1603 SUPREME-COURTHADAYAT ULLAH VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN art. 188---Review jurisdiction of the Supreme Court---Scope---Review jurisdiction of the Court opera…
2022 PLC(CS) 646 ISLAMABADNAEEM ANWAR VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Commerce and Textile arts.91, 92, 93 & 67(1)---Power of advisor to the…
2022 PLC 15 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTKHALID VS PAKISTAN TOBACCO COMPANY AKORA KHATTAK, DISTRICT OWSHERA, KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA S.2(i)---"Salesman", status of---Scope---Work of sale…
2022 PLC(CS) 73 ISLAMABADHAMID NASRULLAH RANJHA VS CHIEF COMMISSIONER, ISLAMABAD, ICT Deputation---Scope---Government servant begins to be regarded as a deputationis…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English