h1

P L D 1999 SC 1026

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN AND OTHERS

V/S

SHAUKAT ALI MIAN AND OTHERS

Per Ajmal Mian C.J.

(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) Art. 7

State Bank of Pakistan which was not covered by the definition of “State” as given in Art. 7 of the Constitution, being itself creature of a statute had no power to impose a tax or cess as envisaged by Art. 7, Constitution of Pakistan (1973), [p. 1053] M

(b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) Art. 8

Vires of statute—Courts in Pakistan apply municipal law and not international laws in order to examine the vires of a provision of a statute —Principles.

In Pakistan the Courts apply municipal law and not international laws in order to examine the vires of a provision of a statute. However, if a municipal law and international law are consistent with each other and there is no conflict or inconsistency, the Court, to reinforce its view as to the interpretation of a Constitutional provision or of a provision of statute may press into service international law and/or conventions. The above approach adopted by this Court in the case of Sardar Farooq Ahmed Khan Leghari…. [p. 1060] DD

(c) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) Art. 9

Protection of Economic Reforms Act (XII of 1992), Ss. 5(4) & 10— Resident/non-resident foreign currency account holders—Denial of the foreign currency deposits and/or the profit therefrom to such depositors— Validity—Benfits to such account holders granted by Supreme Court detailed. [p. 1060] EE

S. 2—Protection of Economic Reforms Act (XII of 1992), Preamble— Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art 9—State Bank of Pakistan Circular No. 12 of 1973—Resident/non-resident foreign currency account holders— Restriction on withdrawal of foreign exchange—Effect—Validity—Denial of foreign currency deposits and the profits therefrom was violative of Art. 9 of the Constitution inasmuch as such account holders had deposited the foreign currency in Pakistan in view of the assurance contained in Circular No. 12 of 1973 and Protection of Economic Reforms Act, 1992 that they would be able to withdraw the deposits without any let or hindrance to meet their liabilities and because of the restrictions in question they could bout lead life as envisaged by Art. 9 of the Constitution. [p. 1060] EE

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: