The Counsel

Legal Updates

Shoaib vs. Project Director, National ICT Scholarship Program,
Ministry of Information Technology and another 2011 Corporate Law Decisions 23 (Division Bench – High Court of Balochistan)

Subject: Constitution

Key words: Independent directors of a Government owned / controlled companies; whether writ / review under Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 (“Constitution”) lies against a Government owned company.

Abstract: The petitioner / student brought a writ against the Ministry of Information Technology (“Ministry”) and National ICT R&D Fund (“Company”) under Article 199 of the Constitution. The Company invited applications for scholarships under the Ministry’s scholarship program funded through the Company. The petitioner / applicant completed the prescribed registration form wherein he also stated his preference of universities. He was admitted in the respondent No.2 institution with the approval of the Company, however, subsequently the Company unilaterally transferred the petitioner to another institution. No prior intimation or hearing was afforded by the Company to the petitioner. The petitioner moved the Court and sought to suspend the decision of Company. Read more here...

Muhammad Masood Butt & 3 others vs. S.M Corporation (Pvt.) Ltd. & 6 others 2011 Corporate Law Decisions 496 (Division Bench – High Court of Sindh)

Subject:Constitution; company law.

Key words: Right of information under Article 19A of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 (“Constitution”); judicial review a company not owned by government.

Abstract: The case involved a constitution petition brought by the petitioners under Article 199(1)(c) of the Constitution. The petitioners were shareholders in the respondent No.1 company and owned 22% of the shares of that company and 33% shares in an associated company. The petitioners sought the Court to direct the respondent company to inter alia (i) declare and distribute the entire un-appropriated profit of Rs.1,900,000, (ii) produce authenticated accounts for the last ten years, and (iii) direct the company to allow the petitioners and their designated accountant to inspect its books of accounts. The question arose as to the maintainability of the petition in relation to the Court’s constitutional jurisdiction over a private limited company. Read more here...