Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
On
Submitted to
Submitted by
Awais Mazhar Roll no 34
Asim Fraz Roll no 31
Azhar Iqbal Roll no 18
Zaheer Abbas Roll no 19
Hafiz Abdul Samad Roll no 26
LLB HONS 7TH SEMESTER
The Case:
In 1954, the then Governor General of Pakistan, Ghulam Muhammad dissolved
the constituent assembly of Pakistan and after that a new cabinet of ministers
was appointed to carry out the functions of the Government. Moulvi
Tammizuddin was also among the dismissed persons. SO he decided to
challenge the act of Governor General in Chief Court of Sindh. In his
complaint, he prayed for Writ of Mandamus against the Governor General for
not interfering in the functions of Constituent Assembly and Writ of Quo
Warranto against the newly appointed cabinet to stop them from working.
Writ of Mandamus:
Mandamus is sought for direction to the subordinate court/tribunal or
government officer to perform mandatory duties correctly. Writ of mandamus is
most popular writ, which is issued against the arbitrary/illegal acts of
government officials including police officers, municipal bodies etc. This writ is
given to a lower-level court or a government officer to mandate that proper laws
are followed. Mandamus might be given if an official is not using his position
appropriately or if a court is not following the laws of the state or country. This
writ (also called the writ of mandate) ensures that the government and the
individuals in charge are performing their functions properly.
Verdict:
With the majority of Four to one, federal court gave its verdict in favour of the
Governor General and the ruling of previous court i.e. Chief Court of Sindh was
made null and void. Federal court stayed away from the real issue of
constitutionality of the Governor Generals power to dissolve the constituent
assembly. Instead, it ruled over a technical point regarding the jurisdiction of the
Chief court of Sindh explaining that Sindh court had no jurisdiction to grant
writ of Mandamus and Quo Warranto to the affected party i.e. Moulvi
Tammizuddin Khan. It reversed the judgment of Sindh court on grounds that
Section 223A of the Government of India Act, 1935 as adapted in Pakistan by
virtue of which Sindh Court issued writ in favour of Tammizuddin Khan was
not yet a law because it had not received the assent of Governor General. Since
section 223A of the act had not received such assent, it was not a law and
therefore the Sindh Court had no power to issue the writs. Since the decision of
the majority of the Federal Court was based on invalidity of Section 223A of the
Government of India Act 1935 for which assent of the Governor General was
necessary, therefore, the court did not go into the other issues.
Conclusion:
To conclude the topic, we can say that the Decision of the Federal Court and its
implications were so severe that it nullified the seven years worth of legislation
of the constituent assembly in a single sweep of pen for almost as many as forty
six acts of the statute became null and void thus creating a legal vacuum.