Google Scholar – an unlimited database of state and federal case legislation, which is searchable by keyword, phrase, or citations. Google Scholar also allows searchers to specify which level of court cases to search, from federal, to specific states.
Article 199 on the Constitution allows High Court intervention only when "no other suitable remedy is provided by regulation." It can be very well-settled that an aggrieved person must exhaust readily available remedies before invoking High Court jurisdiction, regardless of whether Individuals remedies suit them. The doctrine of exhaustion of remedies prevents unnecessary High Court litigation. Read more
Matter:-HARASSMENT Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Creator) Const. P. 1479/2024 (S.B.) Mst. Shir Bano and another V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi SHC Citation: SHC-252214 Tag:Primarily, this is really a free and democratic place, and once a person becomes a major he / she can marry whosoever he/she likes; if the parents with the boy or Lady tend not to approve of these types of inter-caste or interreligious marriage the utmost they can do if they're able to Reduce off social relations with the son or perhaps the daughter, Nevertheless they cannot give threats or commit or instigate for acts of violence and cannot harass the person who undergoes this kind of inter-caste or inter-religious marriage. I therefore, direct that the administration/police authorities will see, if any boy or Lady who is major undergoes inter-caste or inter-religious marriage with a woman or male that's a major, the pair is neither harassed by anybody nor subjected to threats or acts of violence and anyone who gives such threats or harasses or commits acts of violence either himself or at his instigation, is taken to process by instituting criminal proceedings from the police against such persons and further stern action is taken against this sort of person(s) as provided by law.
Persuasive Authority – Prior court rulings that could be consulted in deciding a current case. It may be used to guide the court, but is just not binding precedent.
This is because transfer orders are typically thought of within the administrative discretion on the employer. However, there could be exceptions in cases where the transfer is determined by malice, personal vendetta, or discrimination against the employee, They could have grounds to challenge before the suitable forum. Read more
Even though there is not any prohibition against referring to case regulation from a state other than the state in which the case is being read, it holds little sway. Still, if read more there is no precedent inside the home state, relevant case regulation from another state could possibly be regarded because of the court.
The Roes accompanied the boy to his therapy sessions. When they were instructed of your boy’s past, they asked if their children were Protected with him in their home. The therapist certain them that they'd practically nothing to fret about.
The legislation as established in previous court rulings; like common legislation, which springs from judicial decisions and tradition.
10. Without touching the merits with the case with the issue of yearly increases from the pensionary emoluments from the petitioner, in terms of policy decision of the provincial government, these types of once-a-year increase, if permissible in the case of employees of KMC, demands further assessment being made from the court of plenary jurisdiction. KMC's reluctance on account of funding issues and deficiency of adoption of provincial increases, creates a factual dispute that cannot be resolved in writ jurisdiction, requiring the petitioner to pursue other legal avenues. Read more
Article 27 of your Constitution does not only safeguard against discrimination on the time of appointment of service but after the appointment in addition. The disparity in the pay out scale allowances of Stenographers during the District Judiciary is within the very clear negation of your regulation laid down by the Supreme Court in its different pronouncements. Read more
162 . Const. P. 256/2025 (D.B.) Hafeezullah V/S Govt of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi It truly is perfectly-settled that the civil servants must first pursue internal appeals within 90 times. Should the appeal isn't decided within that timeframe, he/she will then technique the service tribunal to challenge the first order. Once they are doing so, the Tribunal must decide the appeal on merits and cannot merely direct the department to decide it, as being the 90 days with the department to act has already expired. To the aforesaid proposition, we have been guided by the decision from the Supreme Court during the case of Dr.
10. Based over the findings from the inquiry committee, this petition just isn't considered maintainable and is therefore liable to generally be dismissed, which is dismissed accordingly with pending application(s) if any. Read more
seventeen . Const. P. 5/2024 (S.B.) Mst. Nasira Khalique Thr. Ms. Seema Khalique V/S The Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 46 I have listened to the discovered counsel for your parties and perused the record with their assistance. I intentionally not making any detail comments as the issues from the matter between the parties pending adjudication before the concerned court with regard to your interim relief application in terms of Section 7(one) of your Illegal Dispossession Act 2005 handy over possession of the subjected premises to the petitioner; that Illegal Dispossession Case needs to become decided by the competent court after hearing the parties if pending as the petitioner has already sought a similar prayer inside the Illegal Dispossession case and as far as the restoration of possession of concerned the trial court must see this facet for interim custody of the subject premises In case the petitioner was found forcibly evicted from the premises in question if she possessed the valid rent agreement and decision be made within two months from the date of receipt of this order. Read more
Rulings by courts of “lateral jurisdiction” aren't binding, but could possibly be used as persuasive authority, which is to present substance to the party’s argument, or to guide the present court.