Justice Manwar Iqbal Dogar issued a written order on citizen Haji Muhammad Ismail’s petition against the Punjab government and others.
LAHORE, (UrduPoint / Pakistan Point News – 15th Sep, 2026) The Lahore High Court dismissed a petition against an arbitration award concerning a payment of Rs180 million, declaring it inadmissible. The court held that an arbitration decision made with the consent of the parties cannot be challenged directly through a constitutional petition, as an alternative legal remedy is available under the law against an arbitration award.
Justice Manwar Iqbal Dogar issued a written order on a petition filed by citizen Haji Muhammad Ismail against the Punjab government and others.
The petitioner had sought to have an award issued by the Punjab secretary of finance, acting as arbitrator in a matter related to the Punjab Capital Market Management Company, declared void.
The petitioner argued that the arbitration award ordered payment of Rs180 million and that he wanted to challenge the decision under the High Court’s constitutional jurisdiction.
During the hearing, Assistant Advocate General Punjab Osman Khan objected to the maintainability of the petition.
He told the court that proceedings concerning the arbitration award were already pending before a civil court and that proceedings to make the award a rule of the court were under way.
Notices had also been issued to the parties in those proceedings.
In its written order, the court observed that the petitioner himself had agreed before a division bench to accept the Punjab secretary of finance as the arbitrator and had also participated in the arbitration proceedings.
The court ruled that a party that agrees to arbitration and participates in the proceedings cannot approach the High Court’s constitutional jurisdiction directly after the decision goes against it.
According to the written decision, an alternative legal remedy is available before a civil court to challenge the arbitration award.
Therefore, a constitutional petition directly challenging the arbitration decision was not maintainable. The court further held that after participating in arbitration, a party cannot use constitutional jurisdiction to directly challenge an arbitration award when the decision is unfavorable.
