High Court’s authority under Article 199 of Pakistan’s 1973 Constitution

High Court's authority under Article 199 of Pakistan's 1973 Constitution

High Court’s authority under Article: According to Article 199 of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s 1973 Constitution, which deals with the High Court’s jurisdiction, anybody may bring a case before the High Court in any Pakistani province if it falls inside its purview.

In accordance with Article 199

“Jurisdiction of High Court,” of the Pakistani Constitution of 1973, (1) “Subject to the Constitution, a High Court may, if it is convinced that no other sufficient remedy is provided by law. On the application of any harmed party, make an order, according to clause (a). It denotes that the High Court has the locus standi—the legal authority—to file a lawsuit or grant relief to the applicant in accordance with this Article.

What a Writ is

Furthermore, Article 199 covers five different sorts of writs. We need first understand what a Writ is. The Writ simply refers to a court order. The subclause (1) of clause 1 (a) of Article 199 states that “directing a person performing, within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court, functions in connection with the affairs of the Federation, a Province, or a local authority, to refrain from doing anything he is not permitted by law to do, or to do anything he is lawfully required to do; or.”

It indicates that there is a “Writ of Prohibito” in this sub-clause 1. Now, the Latin root of the word Prohibito means “to stop.” The High Court has the jurisdiction to issue a Writ of Prohibito to an authority carrying out its duties without legal authorization. It is given by the High Court or Supreme Court to any lower court to forbid their action in a unique circumstance.

Additionally, pursuant to Article 199, subclause 2, clause 1(a), “declaring that any act done or proceeding taken within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court by a person performing functions in connection with the affairs of the Federation, a Province, or a local authority has been done or taken without lawful authority and is of no legal effect; or.”

It refers to the “Writ of Mandamus,” a Latin phrase that means “we command.” The goal of the Writ of Mandamus, which the High Court may issue, is to maintain public authorities within their range of authority or jurisdiction. Meaning that the authority should exercise its power and authority only within its prescribed limits.

Additionally, the word “Certiorari,” which means “to be certified,” is a Latin word. The Writ of Certiorari was created to stop or prevent the overuse of power by public authorities, such as the police, so that they could only use their powers for good and not to violate the rights of people.

A person in custody within the Court’s territorial jurisdiction may be brought before the Court so that it may be satisfied that he is not being held in custody without legal justification or in an unlawful manner, according to Article 199, clause 1, subclause (b), which states that “on the application of any person, make an order” and subclause (b)(1).

The Latin phrase “to produce the body or you may have the body” is the root of the Writ of Habeas Corpus. The purpose of this Writ is to specify under what authority you may remove a person from custody, whether they are in a jail or a private home. If you don’t have a good reason to take someone away, you can’t take him away without a warrant either.

In addition, Article 199, clause b, subclause 2, provides that “requiring a person within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court holding or purporting to hold a public office to show under what authority of law he claims to hold that office; or” This document is known as a “Writ of Quo-Warranto,” which is a Latin phrase that translates to “what is your authority or by what warrants.”

The basic goal of Quo-Warranto is to specify the qualifications necessary for holding an office. To ensure that a person does not act outside of his or her authority or jurisdiction, the High Court may issue a writ of Quo-Warranto in the absence of any authoritative person using another person’s authority.

Therefore, under Article 199, the High Court may issue any or all five of these Writs. Further reading reveals that clause (C) of Article 199 of the Pakistani Constitution provides that “on the application of any aggrieved person, make an order giving such directions to any person or authority, including any Government exercising any power or performing any function in, or in relation to, any territory within the jurisdiction of that Court as may be appropriate for the enforcement of any of the Fundamental Rights conferred by Chapter 1 of Part II.” This section states that the High Court has the authority and the ability to uphold any Fundamental Rights that are or may be violated in accordance with Article 199.

Additionally, Article 199, section 2, clause 2, provides that “Subject to the Constitution, the right to move a High Court for the enforcement of any of the Fundamental Rights conferred by Chapter 1 of Part II shall not be abridged.” It means that citizens have the right to initiate a case directly with the High Court under Article 199 if any of the Fundamental Rights are violated.

Because the military has a separate Military Court, Article 199, clause (1) cannot be applied to the armed forces or any other type of forces, according to clause (3).

In accordance with Article 199, clause (4) states that a High Court must be asked for an order that falls under clause (1)’s subparagraphs (a) or (c). Further, it states that if the order is approved, it will only be a temporary order (limited time period), as a longer duration would have an adverse effect on public property, activities in the public interest, or the collection of public funds.

Furthermore, in accordance with clause (4B) of Article 199, a High Court must render a definitive judgment within six months of issuing an interim order. Because if the interim order is not important, it will be useless or have no benefit.

The High Courts are granted a wide range of authority and original jurisdiction under Article 199, as we previously covered.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *