Maulvi Tameez-ud-Din vs. Federation: A Landmark Case
Maulvi Tameez-ud-Din vs. Federation
The Judiciary plays a very important role in the interpretation of statutes and laws. It has an important role in the development of law. In Pakistan, the superior courts gave judgments which became precedents. There have been many important and leading cases in the history of Pakistan. Maulvi Tameez-ud-Din vs. Federation is one of the most important cases in the history of Pakistan.
Facts of the Case
Following are the important facts of the case of Moulvi Tameez-ud-Din vs. Federation.
Dissolution of the Constituent Assembly
The Governor-General Ghulam Mohammad of Pakistan dissolved the Constituent Assembly on October 24, 1954. There were some clashes between the Prime Minister and Governor-General regarding the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly.
Governor-General Also Dissolved Cabinet in 1953
The Governor-General dissolved the cabinet in 1953. Before the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly of Maulvi Tameez-ud-Din, the Governor-General of Pakistan in 1953 also dismissed the cabinet of Nizam-ud-Din.
Reconstitution of the Council of Ministers
After the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly, the Council of Ministers was reconstituted.
Action Taken by Maulvi Tameez-ud-Din
Maulvi Tameez-ud-Din, who was the head of the Constituent Assembly, filed a writ petition before the Chief Court Sind. This petition was against the Federation.
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.
Number of Writs Filed
He filed two writ petitions in order to redress his grievance. They were as follows:
- Writ of Mandamus: A writ of mandamus was filed by 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 in the functions of Maulvi Tameez-ud-Din.
- Writ of Quo Warranto: A writ of quo warranto was also filed by Maulvi Tameez-ud-Din demanding that the ministers should be asked under which authority they were holding the offices.
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:
- Dissolution of Constituent Assembly Was Right: It was argued that the Constituent Assembly was dissolved in a right way.
- No Writ Jurisdiction of the Chief Court:It was further argued that the Chief Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition.
- Invalidity of Section 223-A: It was further argued by the Federation that Section 223-A, which was put into the Government of India Act 1935, was invalid due to the non-assent of the Governor-General, which was very necessary for all laws.
Decision of the Chief Court
The Chief Court of Sind declared null and void the step taken by Ghulam Muhammad, Governor-General, and restored the assembly.
Appeal of Federation Before the Federal Court
The Federation and Council of Ministers appealed before the Federal Court against the decision of Chief Court Sind.
Decision by the Federal Court
- Governor-General Assent is Necessary: It was observed that the Constituent Assembly also performs its functions as the legislature, and all laws passed by it require the assent of the Governor-General.
- Section 223-A of Government of India Act Was Not Law: Section 223-A of the Government of India Act 1935 was not law due to the non-assent of the Governor-General.
- No Jurisdiction of Chief Court: It was further observed that Section 223-A is not a law; therefore, the Chief Court did not have any jurisdiction to issue writs.
- Constituent Has No Sovereignty: According to the Federal Court, the Constituent Assembly is not sovereign, but the Governor-General is a sovereign authority.
Effect of the Decision
In the decision of the Federal Court, the decision of the Chief Court of Sind was suspended.
Bench of Federal Court
- Chief Justice: Mohammad Munir
- Justice: Mohammad Sharif
- Justice: S.A. Rehman
- Justice: S.M. Akram
- Justice: R. Cornelius
Conclusion
In the end, we can say that the Federal Court decided the case in favor of the Federation and the Council of Ministers. The dissolution of the Constituent Assembly was held right, and it dismissed the writ petition.