Correction of Name in NADRA

PLJ      2012     Lahore High Court     717

Present to: Ayesha A. Malik

 MUHAMMAD SALAH-UD-DIN 
Versus
NADRA

 Constitution of Pakistan, 1973– —-Art. 199–NADRA (NIL) Rules, 2002–National Identity Card was legal document for identification of citizen–CNIC wrongfully mentioned name of father–Correction of office mistake–Request for correction of office mistake was not made within stipulated time–Court order was required–Validity–It was perpetuating a wrong in its own data base, which negates purpose of national identity card–NADRA was bound to maintain a correct data base and was bound to print correct information on CNIC–Since petitioner was issued a NIC in 1981 and card states his father name as Haji Channan Din and NADRA was obligated to correct any error in its data base or on CNIC it issues to citizen–At best its an internal document and cannot from the basis of denying petitioner right to have correct information maintained in citizen data base and printed on CNIC–If error was not corrected it would negate very purpose of issuing CNIC to a citizen–Delay in filing application for correction of an office mistake cannot hamper or prevent the process of actually correcting data base or CNIC–Petition was accepted.

Judgement Result: Petition disposed of

Correction of date of Birth

PLJ      2017     Peshawar High Court     32

Present to: NISAR HUSSAIN KHAN AND WAQAR AHMAD SETH

 GHAFOOR KHAN 
Versus
SECRETARY TO GOVT. OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT PESHAWAR and 4 others

 Constitution of Pakistan, 1973– —-Art. 199–Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, R. 12-A–Constitutional petition–Correction of date of birth in service book–Salary was stopped–Suit for declaration seeking correction in date of birth as wrongly entered in record of NADRA–Suit was decreed–Correction of date of birth in CNIC and not in service record–Maintainability–Decree of Civil Court obtained by petitioner was not binding or applicable to government–Civil servant had not arrayed education department a party in suit–Suit was merely against NADRA for correction of date of birth in CNIC–Civil servant at stage of retirement could not be allowed to take any benefit regarding matter about which he himself was negligent and illiteracy or otherwise of civil servant was no ground at all–Petition was dismissed. [Pp. 37 & 38] A & B 2003 SCMR 444, 2004 PLC (CS) 1162 & 1998 SCMR 1494, ref.

Judgement Result: Petition dismissed

Paternity of Minor

Paternity of Minor– —-Disown paternity of minor by father-Jurisdiction–Question of paternity can only be decided by Civil Court–Validity–Question of paternity cannot be determined by Family Court and as such District Judge in appeal could not remand case to Family Court to determine paternity of minor–Family Court as well as Court of District Judge is not a Court of civil jurisdiction as understood in CPC–It is only a civil Court which can adjudicate upon paternity of minor.

PLJ 2016 Lahore High Court 818

Supreme Court Decision Binding on all courts

Decision of Supreme Court Binding

Article 189 of Constitution of Paistan.. Decision of Supreme Court—Binding effect… decision of Supreme Court enunciating principle of law was binding on all other courts in Pakistan—Judgment passed by any court including High Court contrary to the dictum laid down by th Supreme Court would be a judgment per incuriam

PLD 2017 Islamabad 162

Blocking the CNIC by NADRA

BLOCKING THE CNIC BY NADRA

Section 18 and 23 of NADRA Ordinance 2000… article 199 of Constitution of Pakistan… Power to block computerized National Identity card CNIC under section 23 of NADRA Ordinance 2000… Legality.. impounding of CNIC in term of section 18 of the Ordinance… procedure.. No clear provision in the ordinance authorized the NADRA to block the CNIC. NADRA has no authority to block the CNIC after issuing a notice to the cardholder under section 23 of ordinance.. however instead of blocking, NADRA had the power to physically or digitally impound a CNIC in terms of section 18 of the ordinance after fulfilling requirement of a Notice and granting opportunity of hearing to the cardholder.. High court gave direction laying down the procedure that had to be followed by NADRA before impounding person’s CNIC

PLD 2017 Sindh 585