ASHFAQ AHMAD KHARAL vs PROVINCE OF PUNJAB art — 2024 PLD 129 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

ASHFAQ AHMAD KHARAL VS PROVINCE OF PUNJAB art. 224(1), (1a) & (1B)---Elections act (XXXIII of 2017), S. 230---Care-taker government---Object, purpose and scope---Care-taker Government is a government temporarily in power until election is held---It is a temporary Government commissioned by Governor-General or State Governor, usually for short period until stable Government can be formed---Care-taker governments are established during the time of uncertainty when it is not clear whether any party or coalition of parties is capable of forming a stable government---Care-taker governments carry on routine business of government but they are expected to refrain from making important policy decisions. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 129 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE ASHFAQ AHMAD KHARAL VS PROVINCE OF PUNJAB art. 224(1), (1a) & (1B)---Elections act (XXXIII of 2017), S. 230---Care-taker government---Scope---Care-taker Government is a government 'sui generis' - one of its kind---Constitution draws distinction between elected Chief Minister and care-taker Chief Minister, as far as obligations, responsibilities, powers and functions are concerned---Elected Provincial Government is accountable and answerable to assembly and care-taker Provincial Government works in absence of an assembly. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 129 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE ASHFAQ AHMAD KHARAL VS PROVINCE OF PUNJAB Relationship---Scope---Client is under no obligation to give reasons for withdrawing his brief from his lawyer---Lawyer is not agent of his client but is a spokesman and advisor to his client. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 129 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE ASHFAQ AHMAD KHARAL VS PROVINCE OF PUNJAB Word 'Public interest'---Scope---Term "public interest" is not capable of precise definition and has no strict meaning but it takes colour from the statute in which it occurs. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 129 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE ASHFAQ AHMAD KHARAL VS PROVINCE OF PUNJAB Maxim "Leges posteriores priores contrarias abrogant"---Applicability---When there is conflict between two special laws containing overriding clauses, generally statute later in time prevails over the statute prior in time---This principle is based on maxim leges posteriores priores contrarias abrogant. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 129 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE ASHFAQ AHMAD KHARAL VS PROVINCE OF PUNJAB Rr. 13(1), 14(1), Third Schedule, Part-A, Serial No. 4 & Seventh Schedule, Part-A Serial No. 16---Punjab Law Department Manual, 1938, Part 1, Chap. 1, Cls. 1.5 & 1.18(4)---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 140 (3)---Advocate General and Law Officers---Appointment and removal---Counsel and client relationship---Distinction---Chief Minister is Competent Authority for appointment and removal of Advocate General, Additional and Assistant Advocates General under the Constitution, Rules of Business and Punjab Law Department Manual---Law Officers cannot be treated at par with government employees or public servants compelling Government to retain a particular counsel irrespective of lack of faith and confidence on said Law Officers by the Government. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 129 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE ASHFAQ AHMAD KHARAL VS PROVINCE OF PUNJAB Part 1, Chap. 1, Cls. 1.5 & 1.18---Elections Act (XXXIII of 2017), S. 230---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 140---Advocate General---Appointment and functions---Dispute was with regard to removal of Advocate General of Punjab Government along with Law Officers working there by Care-taker government---Held, that dispensing with service of Law Officers is not to be necessary based upon displeasure of the Governor---Sole purpose of Care-taker government is to conduct fair and free elections---If Care-taker government was of the view that such Law Officers were not helpful in creating impression of impartiality in the mind of public, their services could be dispensed with---This was objective decision of Care-taker Chief Executive---High Court upheld the notification for removal of Advocate General Punjab and other law officers---High Court set aside notification for appointment of such new Law Officers to the extent of Law Officers who retained their offices in the political government immediately preceding the last government---Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 129 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE ASHFAQ AHMAD KHARAL VS PROVINCE OF PUNJAB S. 230---Term "public interest"---Scope---Term "public interest" is to ensure honest, just, free and fair elections in accordance with law, which is also the mandate of Arts. 218 to 224 & 224-A of the Constitution. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 129 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE ASHFAQ AHMAD KHARAL VS PROVINCE OF PUNJAB art. 140---Elections act (XXXIII of 2017), S. 230---Punjab Law Department Manual, 1938, Part 1, Chap. 1, Cl. 1.5---advocate General and other law officers---Removal from office---Public interest---Dispute was with regard to notification appointing Law Officers, who were also Law Officers in the Government preceding previous Government---Validity---Such Law Officers could not be justified on the touch stone of public interest and if they were allowed to continue as Law Officers, that would defeat the entire purpose of transparency urged and appointment of those independent Law Officers who have not been appointed by any political Government earlier to ensure free and fair elections in the public interest---High Court declared the notification as ultra vires of law and S.230 of Elections act, 2017, to the extent of such Law Officers and not sustainable---Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 129 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE ASHFAQ AHMAD KHARAL VS PROVINCE OF PUNJAB Care-taker---Meaning---Care-taker is a person who takes care of certain things and fulfills his responsibility so entrusted to him---Such person holds the fort to protect and discharge his assigned duties---Care-taker is the one who looks after in the owner's absence. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 129 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE ASHFAQ AHMAD KHARAL VS PROVINCE OF PUNJAB Part 1, Chap. 1, Cl. 1.5---Elections Act (XXXIII of 2017), S.230---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 25 & 140---Advocate General and other law officers---Appointment and removal---Care-taker government, jurisdiction of---Scope---Discrimination---Dispute was with regard to removal of Advocate General and other Law Officers by Care-taker government of Punjab province on the plea of political affiliation with outgoing political party---Validity---Appointment of Advocate General is a substantial appointment and otherwise falls in the realm of major policy decision---Simplicitor removal of Advocate General on the allegation of having political affiliation/association - solely because appointed by elected Provincial Government - and without any plausible justification and reasoning and without seeking indulgence of Election Commission, per se violated mandate of S. 230(1)(d) of Elections Act, 2017---Such action could not otherwise be construed as an impartial act to a political party---Segregation so made had no basis in law and in fact stigmatized excluded Law Officers, risking their chances of seeking appointment in the office, by dint of their competency and merits---This was discrimination and did not meet test of reasonable classification---Excluding nineteen (19) Law Officers contravened the Constitutional mandate and had rendered effect of Art. 140(2) of the Constitution ineffectual, which prescribed scope of duties for Advocate General---High Court directed Care-taker Provincial Government to operate and function within the ambit of S. 230 of the Elections Act, 2017 and set aside appointment of fresh Law Officers---Constitutional petition was allowed in circumstances.

ASHFAQ AHMAD KHARAL vs PROVINCE OF PUNJAB art — 2024 PLD 129 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLD