Constitutional Law · Legal issue collection

Review Jurisdiction in Pakistan

Research review proceedings through Pakistani cases on hearing rights, an alleged error apparent and a repeat challenge. Compare the original order, review ground and the actual disposition in each decision.

Showing 1–3 of 3 · Page 1 of 1

Research starting points

Start with these decisions

Selected from the linked collection. Read the full judgment, facts and procedural context before relying on a proposition.

Supreme Court of Pakistan, Appellate Jurisdiction · Judgment Commentary

Sher Azam v. State: Supreme Court Rejects Chamber Review Without Hearing

Sher Azam v. The State · Criminal Review Petition No. 173 of 2017 in Criminal Petition No. 157 of 2011; Criminal Miscellaneous Appeal No. 9 of 2017 · Supplementary opinion approved for reporting; reported citation not yet assigned

The Supreme Court held that dismissing a review in chambers without hearing violated Articles 4 and 10-A, with implications for criminal and civil review cases.

Supreme Court of Pakistan (Review Jurisdiction) · News Analysis

Error Apparent in Review: Supreme Court Recalls Ramzan’s Service Dismissal Decision

Muhammad Ramzan v. Regional Police Officer, Multan and others · C.R.P. 1226/2023 in C.A. 1590-L/2021 and C.R.P. 1227/2023 in C.P.L.A. 1309-L/2021 (as headed) · Approved for reporting; reporter citation not printed

Supreme Court recalls Ramzan’s service decision after finding reliance on an ineffective dismissal order; department must follow Tribunal inquiry directions.

Continue your research

More relevant judgments and articles

Federal Constitutional Court of Pakistan · Judgment Commentary

FCC Rejects OGDCL Recall Bid as Barred Second Review in Pension Case

Managing Director, Oil & Gas Development Company Limited, Islamabad v. Registrar, Federal Constitutional Court, Islamabad & another · Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 37 of 2026 · Order dated 2026-09-30; approved for reporting; no reported citation in supplied copy

The FCC held that OGDCL’s recall application sought substantive reconsideration of a concluded review, so the Registrar properly applied the express second-review bar.