PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

MUHAMMAD ASLAM TUNIO vs EXECUTIVE ENGINEER SCARP, LARKANA arts — 2024 PLD 442 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2024 PLD 442 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2024
Reporter
PLD
Parties
MUHAMMAD ASLAM TUNIO vs EXECUTIVE ENGINEER SCARP, LARKANA arts
Subject matter
Civil

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

MUHAMMAD ASLAM TUNIO VS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER SCARP, LARKANA arts. 175(2), 189, 190, 199 & 204---Suo motu jurisdiction of High Court for specific performance of contractual obligations by private parties---Scope---Letter was addressed by the petitioner to Senior Judge of High Court for facilitating him in a private cause, whereupon, office was directed to prepare the nomenclature of the respondents and issue notice to them and that too without filing of a constitutional petition---Letter was converted into a constitutional petition and despite disclosure of fact as to contractual obligations of private person, directions were issued to the representative of a private company under threat of coercive action under art. 204 of the Constitution---Legality---article 175(2) of the Constitution mandates that no court shall have any jurisdiction save as that conferred by the Constitution or the law----High Court following the judgments of Supreme Court found itself unable to sustain a petition actuated by an apparent unmerited suo motu, whereby coercive recourse was manifest to compel strangers towards specific performance of some extraneous contract---Judgments of Supreme Court are binding on all judicial and executive authorities of the country per arts. 189 & 190 of the Constitution---Disregard to Supreme Court judgments inter alia unsettles the integrity and sanctity of the Supreme Court and renders inconsistent pronouncements of High Court as not only without jurisdiction but also unconstitutional---Issue between the contractor and its principal was contractual in nature, hence, not amenable to adjudication in writ jurisdiction, especially so when none of the parties to the contract had ever approached the High Court---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstance.

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLD

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