Maulvi Tameez

MAULVI TAMEEZ-UD-DIN VS FEDERATION
It is one of important case of history of Pakistan.On that time when moulvi tameez-
ud-din was the prime minister of Pakistan, Governor Genral Ghulam Muhammad
dissolved his assembly. Maulvi tameez-ud-din sue petition in chief court of sind
against the decision of Governor General. 2.
1. FACTS OF THE CASE.
Following are the important facts of the case of moulvi tameez-ud-din vs

federation.
(I). DISSOLUTION OF THE CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY.
The Governor General ghulam mohammad of Pakistan dissolved the constituent

assembly in Oct, 24 1954. There were some clashes among the prime minister and
governor general which were caused regarding the dissolution of the constituent
assembly.
(II). GOVERNOR GENERAL ALSO DISSOLVED CABINET IN 1953.
Governor general dissolved cabinet in 1953 before the dissolution of the constituent
assembly of maulvi tameez-ud-din, the governor general of Pakistan in 1953 also
dismissed cabinet of nizam-ud-din.
(III). RECONSTITUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS.
After the dissolution of the constituent assembly, the council of ministers was
reconstituted.
(IV). ACTION TAKEN BY THE MAULVI TAMEEZ-UD-DIN.
Maulvi tameez-ud-din who was the head of the constituent assembly filed a writ
petition before the cheif court sind. This petition was against the federation.
(a). WRIT PETITION.
Maulvi tameez-ud-din filed the writ petition in the chief court sind under section
223.A of the government of india act 1935.
(b). NUMBERS OF WRITS FILED.
He filed two writ petitions in order to redress his grievance. They were as follow.
WRIT OF MANDAMUS.
A writ of mandamus was filed by the maulvi tameez-ud-din, in order to restrain the
enforcement of the proclamation of the governor general. It was also prayed that
the federation and the members of the reconstituted council of ministers should be
prohibited from meddling into the functions of maulvi tameez-ud-din.
WRIT OF QUO WARRANTO.
A writ of quo warranto was also filed by the maulvi tameez-ud-din demanding that
the ministers should be asked as under which authority they were holding the
offices.
2. ARGUMENTS GIVEN BY THE STATE.
The federation and the council of ministers gave arguments in respect of writs filed
by maulvi tameez-ud-din.
Following were the arguments given by the federation.
(I). DISSOLUTION OF CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY WAS RIGHT.
It was argued that the constituent assembly was dissolved in a right way.
(II). NO WRIT JURISDICTION OF THE CHIEF COURT.
It was further argued that the chief court had no jurisdiction to entertain the writ
petition.
(III). INVALIDITY OF SECTION 223-A.
It was further argued by the federation that the section 223-A which was put into
the government of India act 1935, was invalid due to non-assent of the governor
general which was very necessary for all laws.
3. DECISION OF THE CHIEF COURT.
The chief court of the sind declare null and void the step taken by the gulam
muhammad governor general and assembly restored.
4. APPEAL OF FEDERATION BEFORE THE FEDERAL COURT.
The federation and council of ministers appealed before the federal court against
the decision of cheif court sind.
5. DECISION BY THE FEDERAL COURT.
(I). GOVERNOR GENERAL ASSENT IS NECESSARY.
It was observed that the constituent assembly also performs its functions as the
legislature and all laws past by it require the assent of governor general
(II). SEC 223-A OF GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT WAS NOT LAW.
Section 223-A of government of India act 1935 was not law due to non-assent of
governor general.
(III). NO JURISDICTION OF CHIEF COURT.
It was further observed that the section 223-A is not a law therefore the chief court
did not have any jurisdiction to issue writs.
(IV). CONSTITUENT HAS NO SOVEREIGNTY.
According to the federal court constituent assembly is not sovereign but governor
general is a sovereign authority.
6. EFFECT OF THE DECISION.
In the decision of federal court the decision of chief court of sind was suspended.
7. BENCH OF FEDERAL COURT.
Chief justice. Mohammad Munir
Justice. Mohammad Sharif
Justice. S.A.Rehman
Justice. S.M.Akram
Justice. R.Cornelius
8. CONCLUSION.
In the end we can say that the federal court decided the case in the favor of the
federation and the council of ministers. The dissolution of constituent assembly was
held right and it dismissed the writ petition.

Maulvi Tameez

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Maulvi Tameez

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Maulvi Tameez

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MAULVI TAMEEZ-UD-DIN VS FEDERATION

1. FACTS OF THE CASE.

Following are the important facts of the case of moulvi tameez-ud-din vs

(I). DISSOLUTION OF THE CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY.

The Governor General ghulam mohammad of Pakistan dissolved the constituent

(II). GOVERNOR GENERAL ALSO DISSOLVED CABINET IN 1953.

(III). RECONSTITUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS.

(IV). ACTION TAKEN BY THE MAULVI TAMEEZ-UD-DIN.

(a). WRIT PETITION.

(b). NUMBERS OF WRITS FILED.

WRIT OF QUO WARRANTO.

2. ARGUMENTS GIVEN BY THE STATE.

Following were the arguments given by the federation.

(I). DISSOLUTION OF CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY WAS RIGHT.

(II). NO WRIT JURISDICTION OF THE CHIEF COURT.

(III). INVALIDITY OF SECTION 223-A.

3. DECISION OF THE CHIEF COURT.

4. APPEAL OF FEDERATION BEFORE THE FEDERAL COURT.

5. DECISION BY THE FEDERAL COURT.

(I). GOVERNOR GENERAL ASSENT IS NECESSARY.

(III). NO JURISDICTION OF CHIEF COURT.

(IV). CONSTITUENT HAS NO SOVEREIGNTY.

6. EFFECT OF THE DECISION.

7. BENCH OF FEDERAL COURT.

Chief justice. Mohammad Munir

Justice. Mohammad Sharif

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.