Shehla Zia v. WAPDA
Pakistan Supreme Court
PLD 1994 SC 693 (1994)
The Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) (defendant) proposed the construction of an electrical grid station in Islamabad. Residents of the area protested the proposed station, citing the potential for adverse health effects caused by the running electricity. Scientific reports on the subject varied, with no definite conclusion drawn about the likelihood of risk to human health. WAPDA maintained that its plan was completely safe and risk-free. Advocates, including lawyer Shehla Zia (plaintiffs), petitioned the court to consider the proposed construction a human-rights case. WAPDA argued that no fundamental right had been violated.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Shah, C.J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 688,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 688,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 43,000 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.