ABID HUSSAIN CHANDIO vs PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary, Sindh arts

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

ABID HUSSAIN CHANDIO VS PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary, Sindh arts. 199(1)(a) & 199(1)(b)(ii)--- Constitution Petition---Main-tainability--- "aggrieved person" meaning of--- Locus standi of petitioner---Writ of quo warranto and habeas corpus---Requirement of being an aggrieved person---Scope---Failure of the petitioner to establish any injury or interest in the litigation---Effect---Proposed amendment in Schedule (I) and (II) of the Sindh Government Rules of Business, 1986 ('the Rules') during the period of Caretaker Government---Legality---Multiple reliefs sought---Effect---Contention of the petitioner was based on an apprehension that the Department after approval of proposed amendment in the Rules ibid would ignore all the other wings of the Department---Contention of the petitioner revolved around a speculative scenario rooted in a hypothetical situation, specifically the Government allegedly introducing additional agenda item without prior Caretaker Cabinet review, which rested on conjectures only and lacked any direct and adverse effect on the petitioner and further lacked the necessary foundation for challenging the proposed amendment---It is inherent duty of the Government to formulate and amend Rules within its respective Departments---"aggrieved person" denotes a person who has suffered a legal grievance, against whom a decision has been pronounced which has wrongfully deprived him or wrongfully refused to him something which he was legally entitled to---Person aggrieved invoking constitutional jurisdiction under art. 199 of the Constitution must establish a direct or indirect injury to himself and substantial interest in subject matter of proceedings, however, for the purpose of issuance of writ of quo waranto and habeas corpus, being aggrieved is not a mandatory requirement---Public interest litigation is a weapon which has to be used with great care and circumspection and courts have to be extremely careful to see that behind the beautiful veil of public interest an ugly private malice, vested interest and or publicity seeking is not lurking---Neither the petitioner was an aggrieved person nor he had any locus standi to challenge the 'proposed amendment in Sindh Government Rules of Business and as regards the other relief[s] sought by the petitioner, he had failed to satisfy the Court as to issuing a writ, and the requested actions, in fact, were within the purview of Legislature or the Executive---Constitutional petition being misconceived was dismissed in limine.

ABID HUSSAIN CHANDIO vs PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary, Sindh arts — 2024 PLD 448 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLD