ABDUL MAJID KHAN vs ELECTION COMMISSION OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR art

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

ABDUL MAJID KHAN VS ELECTION COMMISSION OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR art. 44---azad Jammu and Kashmir Election Commission act (XVIII of 2020), S. 21---Writ petition---Preparation of electoral rolls---Scope---Petitioners called in question the vires of notifications issued by the Election Commission regarding formation of committees for verification of Electoral Rolls for the Constituencies of Refugees settled in Pakistan---Validity---Impugned notifications were issued in accordance with S.21(1) of the azad Jammu and Kashmir Election Commission act, 2020, with clear cut objective to enroll all the state subjects who were not holding State Subject Certificate---Election Commission after the consultation with all the concerned political parties had issued the impugned notifications correctly and rightly---Formation of committees also revealed that the committees did not consist upon the members of a single party rather the member of rival political parties were included in the committees having clash of interest, hence, no question of mala fide or arbitrariness or unreasonableness arose---Writ petition was dismissed. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 17 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case ABDUL MAJID KHAN VS ELECTION COMMISSION OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR art. 2(1)---"State Subject"---Scope---Fundamental Rights are guaranteed to all the state subjects and not to the State Subject Certificate holder---Person who is state subject as defined in the Constitution has all rights guaranteed by the Constitution whether he is holding the State Subject Certificate or not and no one can be deprived of from his fundamental or legal right on the ground that he is not holding the State Subject Certificate. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 17 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case ABDUL MAJID KHAN VS ELECTION COMMISSION OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR art. 44---Writ jurisdiction---Judicial review---Scope---Courts have vast powers for judicial review of any action of any functionary of the State but such power should not be exercised to interfere within constitutional or legal domain of any other organ of the State---Such exercise of the powers is also against the concept of trichotomy as provided by the Constitution. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 17 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case ABDUL MAJID KHAN VS ELECTION COMMISSION OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR art. 2(1)---"State Subject"---Scope---State Subject Certificate is the de facto citizenship certificate of the people residing in or belonging to the State of Jammu and Kashmir, currently divided into two parties i.e. azad Kashmir and Indian Occupied Kashmir. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 17 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case SAEEDA BIBI VS JUDGE FAMILY COURT, MUZAFFARABAD S.5, Sched.---Suits for dower, dowry articles, monthly maintenance---Petitioner/plaintiff filed application before trial Court for summoning two documents: a divorce deed and an agreement regarding receiving of dower amount from respondent, which was rejected by the Court after hearing and considering objections thereto---Petitioner categorically alleged in the application that both the said documents had been obviously in the power and the possession of respondent and in such situation it was incumbent upon the Court to order for production of such documents; that such documents were bearing pivotal role for adjudication of the case (whether dower had been paid or not)---Held, that both the parties simultaneously were denying the possession of the documents sought to be produced---Such was purely disputed question of fact which could be resolved by the Trial Court after recording evidence and the initial burden of proof was on the shoulder of the petitioner to adduce the evidence in that regard---Petitioner had alternate remedy to pray for framing of specific issue regarding possession of said documents but she did not apt to do so---Mere assertion of having no alternate remedy against interim orders was not sufficient to claim issuance of writ at random---Writ petition was dismissed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 17 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case ABDUL MAJID KHAN VS ELECTION COMMISSION OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR arts.44 & 50---Writ petition---Election Commission---Maintainability---Scope---Election Commission of azad Jammu and Kashmir is empowered under art. 50 of the azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution act, 1974 to conduct elections of the Legislative assembly of azad Jammu and Kashmir---Election Commission is a constitutional body which performs its functions independently, freely, fairly and transparently---acts done by Election Commission should not be interfered in an ordinary manner---Powers vested to the Election Commission are trust and can be expected to be performed objectively, reasonably, independently and in accordance with law---However, the possibility of breach of law, arbitrariness and mala fide cannot be overruled---In any constitutional petition, it is necessary for the petitioner to prove that the impugned act of the Commission is against the law, arbitrary or with mala fide, otherwise, the writ petition is not maintainable for academic discussions and it will amount to interference in the election process which is not warranted by law. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 17 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case ABDUL MAJID KHAN VS ELECTION COMMISSION OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR art. 44---Writ jurisdiction---Judicial review---Scope---Courts do not normally interfere a policy made by the Government unless it is proved mala fide or made in a colorful exercise of authority. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 17 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case SAEEDA BIBI VS JUDGE FAMILY COURT, MUZAFFARABAD S. 22---Interlocatory orders---Remedy---Azad Jammu and Kashmir Family Courts Act, 1993 and Rules made thereunder had not recognized any sort of statutory remedy against the interlocutory orders and the wisdom of the legislature was manifest and evident from scheme of law itself---Practice of attacking interlocutory orders of Family Court in constitutional jurisdiction was liable to be buried in its very inception as right of appeal/revision/review were admittedly creatures of statute---Such practice was burdening the Court with unnecessary litigation and frustrated the basic intent/purpose of special law. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 17 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case ABDUL MAJID KHAN VS ELECTION COMMISSION OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR art. 44---Writ jurisdiction---Necessary party---Scope---No writ can be issued in the absence of a necessary party. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 17 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case ABDUL MAJID KHAN VS ELECTION COMMISSION OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR art. 44---Writ jurisdiction---Scope---Order can only be set aside in exercise of writ jurisdiction, if it violates any provision of law. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 17 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case ABDUL MAJID KHAN VS ELECTION COMMISSION OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR art.44---Writ jurisdiction---Necessary party---Proper party---Scope---Writ petition, in absence of a necessary party, itself is incompetent---Necessary party is one without whom no order can be made effectively and a proper party is one in whose absence an effective order can be made but whose presence is necessary for complete and final decision on the question involved in the proceedings. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 17 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case ABDUL MAJID KHAN VS ELECTION COMMISSION OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR art. 44---Writ jurisdiction---Scope---Writ jurisdiction can be exercised only, where there is violation of law or principle of law. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 17 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case ABDUL MAJID KHAN VS ELECTION COMMISSION OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR art. 44---Writ jurisdiction---Scope---Phraseology of art. 44 of the azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution, 1974, clearly indicates that writ jurisdiction is exercisable if a grievance is based on violation of a law---Under art. 44, if an act is without lawful authority, a writ can be issued to direct the respondent to do that which he is required by law to do or to forbid him from doing an act which he is not allowed by law to do---Requirement is that a grievance raised in a writ petition must be based on law---Writ lies if law has been violated or, in case of a writ of prohibition, when it is apprehended that it will be violated by a Government functionary.

ABDUL MAJID KHAN vs ELECTION COMMISSION OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR art — 2023 PLD 17 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PLD