Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD NAWAZ VS Respondent: REHMAT BIBI
1988 S C M R 1976
1988 S C M R 1976
Present: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal, JJ
MUHAMMAD NAWAZ and others‑‑Petitioners
versus
Mst. REHMAT BIBI and another‑‑Respondents
Civil Petition No.65 of 1982, decided on 30th July, 1988.
(On appeal from the judgment and order, dated 16‑11‑1981 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Writ Petition No.5326 of 1981).
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑
‑‑‑Arts.185 (3) & 199‑‑Constitutional jurisdiction, exercise of‑ Petitioners' second petition in respect of same subject‑matter‑‑Basic order having remained intact in the field, High Court's order refusing to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction in favour of petitioners in second round, held, unexceptionable‑‑Leave to appeal refused.
Malik Talib Hussain Awan, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 30th July, 1988.
ORDER
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑The defendants in a suit have called in question the dismissal of their writ petition by the High Court on the technical question of the summoning of their witnesses. The petitioners had earlier come to the High Court in respect of the same subject‑matter and their writ petition was dismissed. This time, it has been held by the High Court that the basic order which went against the petitioners passed on 25th May, 1980, having remained intact in the field, the petitioners could not succeed in the writ petition in the second round. It is not denied that the writ jurisdiction of the High Court is discretionary.
After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, we are satisfied that the refusal to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioners by the High Court, was unexceptional.
Leave to appeal, accordingly, is refused.
M.I. /M‑569/S Petition dismissed.