This consolidated judgment shall decide the instant intra-court appeal as well as I.C.A. Nos.1090 and 1091 of 2013, I.C.A.Nos.08, 31, 32 and 33 of 2014, I.C.A.Nos.1379,1380, 103865 of 2017 and I.C.A.No.157300 of 2018, as all these matters involve common questions of law and fact.2. Through these intra-court appeals, filed under Section 3(2) of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972, the appellants have challenged the vires of the impugned judgment dated 08.11.2013 passed in Writ Petition No.4927 of 2013 along with other connected writ petitions, whereby the learned Single Judge in Chambers allowed the constitutional petition filed by respondent No.1. The operative portion of the said judgment is reproduced below: -"11. In view of the aforesaid, all these petitioners areallowedand sub clause (d) of the impugned SRO No.77(I) of 2013 dated 7.2.2013 is declared to be illegal and it is not in consonance with the decision of the ECC and is set aside."3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the r...
PRESENT:
(ABID AZIZ SHEIKH) JUDGE (MALIK JAVID IQBAL WAINS) JUDGE
Petitioner(s) by: M/s Ahmad Pervaiz, Muhammad Nauman Khan, Malik Abdullah Raza and Azmat Hayat Khan Lodhi, Advocates..
Respondent(s) by: M/s Salman Zaheer Khan, Ali Sabtain Fazli, Hasham Ahmad Khan, Abad-ur- Rehman, Salma Riaz, Mazhar Hussain and Ali Haider Shah Zulfiqar, Advocates..
Law: Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972
Sections: 3(2),
Law: Federal Excise Act, 2005
Sections: 3, 3(4), 29
Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001
Sections: 209
Disclaimer / Note: We have reproduced the judgment for facilitation of readers; however, the readers must study the original or certified copy of the above said judgment before referring it in any Court of Law. The judgment as reproduced above is a reported judgment available in law magazines and journals namely: 2026 PTD 347