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

ALTAF HUSSAIN BUTT vs FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE through Chairman, FBR art — 2025 PLC(CS) 1190 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2025 PLC(CS) 1190 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2025
Reporter
PLC
Parties
ALTAF HUSSAIN BUTT vs FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE through Chairman, FBR art
Subject matter
Constitutional

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

ALTAF HUSSAIN BUTT VS FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE through Chairman, FBR art.199---'Pension Fund Trust', abolition of---Constitutional petition, maintainability of---Public limited company---Public limited company not amenable to Constitutional jurisdiction---Factual controversies involving disputed questions---Recording of evidence, requirement of---Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court, scope of---Factual controversies cannot be entertained under Constitutional jurisdiction as same require recording of evidence and recording of evidence cannot be undertaken in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction---Brief facts of the matter were that the petitioner was a former employee of a public limited company who challenged the alleged unlawful abolition and winding up of the "Pension Fund Trust" and further disputed a document claiming his signature upon it was obtained without free consent and under coercion---He sought to invalidate these documents which were allegedly obtained by the company---Held: The public limited company was incorporated under the relevant company laws and was not amenable to constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court under art. 199 of the Constitution since it did not fall within the definition of a "person" as contemplated in art. 199(5) thereof---Furthermore, the question of whether the petitioner's signature on the document in question was obtained through coercion or without free consent involved disputed questions of facts and required recording of evidence which could not be undertaken in the exercise of writ jurisdiction under art. 199 of the Constitution---Moreover, the validity and enforceability of the 'declaration' though which the petitioner allegedly opted for a lump sum payment and other service benefits involved contested factual issues that fell outside the scope of Constitutional proceedings---Constitutional petition failing to meet the threshold for the exercise of constitutional jurisdiction, was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLC

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