NAEEM AHMAD KHATTAK vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Human Rights, Islamabad S

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

NAEEM AHMAD KHATTAK VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Human Rights, Islamabad Ss. 5a(1)(b) [as amended by Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils (amendment) act (XXXV of 2018)] & 9---Constitution of Pakistan, arts. 18, 25 & 199---Constitutional petition---Qualification of candidate---Standing at Bar---Enhancement---Vires of law---Intelligible differentia, principle of---applicability---Petitioner assailed amendment made to S. 5a(1)(b) of Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils act, 1973, enhancing period of an advocate's standing at the bar for contesting election as a member of a Provincial Bar Council (PBC) on the day of filing nomination papers, to fifteen (15) years---Validity---Key requirement for membership of PBC ensures a certain level of legal knowledge and competence---Such requirement involving a specific number of years of practice at the bar, helps guarantee that elected members have practical understanding of legal system and can effectively represent interests of lawyers across the province---Enhancement of threshold of experience was duly warranted as per functions of PBC stated in S. 9 of Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils act, 1973---amendment in question did not bar petitioner or any advocate from practicing law but merely regulated eligibility for membership in a representative professional body, a regulation squarely within the permissible scope of art. 18 of the Constitution---Provision of art. 25 of the Constitution mandates equality before law and equal protection of law and reasonable classification is permissible if it is based on intelligible differentia and bears a rational nexus to the object sought to be achieved---Classification drawn between advocates having less than fifteen years of standing and those exceeding it, rested on intelligible criterion of professional experience, which had a direct and reasonable nexus with effective performance of the functions of a PBC---High Court declined to interfere in the amendment in question as no element of invidious discrimination was shown by the petitioner---amendment in question did not offend guarantees enshrined in Constitutional provisions---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

NAEEM AHMAD KHATTAK vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Human Rights, Islamabad Ss — 2025 CLC 1902 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC