Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Writ Petition No. 520 of 1965, decided on 22nd November 1965.
‑Terms and conditions of service not specifically provided in Consti tution‑Not subject to adjudication in petition under Art. 98 (2).
Article 98(3)(b) contemplates that no order can be passed by the High Court under Article 98 (2), if it relates to terms and conditions of service of a petitioner. There is only one exception, namely, in case of terms and conditions which are specifically provided as such in the Constitution itself. No petition will lie for an adjudication upon terms and conditions of any holder of a civil post in the service of Pakistan, unless there is a violation of specific terms and conditions mentioned in the body of the Constitution itself.
‑Benefits with regard to retention in service after superannuation‑Not enforceable by petition under Art. 98(2), Constitution of Pakistan (1962).
It is well‑settled that an order of retirement after the age of superannuation of a person employed in the service of Pakistan does not amount to either dismissal or removal. 7 his proposi tion is clear. Therefore, the grievance of the petititioner virtu ally amounts to this that proper indulgences have not been given to the petitioner in accordance with the aforesaid Rules. This is a matter on which the High Court is not, empowered to pass an order under Article 98(2) of the Constitution in view of the provisions of sub‑Article (3) (b) of Article 98.
K. M. Ahmed and M. Zahir for Petitioner.
Respondent: Ex parte.
.‑In this application the petitioner has come with a grievance that the benefits conferred upon him by the Civilian Employees in Defence Services (Further Usefulness in Service) Rules, 1964, have been violated. Without entering into the merits of the case the question that arises is. Is it so, in view of the provisions of Article 98(3) (b) of the Constitution
Article 98(3)(b) contemplates that no order can be passed by this Court under Article 98 (2),, if it relates to terms and 5 conditions of service of a petitioner. There is only one excep tion, namely, in case of terms and conditions which are specifically provided as such in the Constitution itself. No petition will lie for an adjudication upon terms and conditions of any holder of a civil post in the service of Pakistan, unless there is a violation of specific terms and conditions mentioned in the body of the Constitution itself.
In this case it is patent that the main grievance of the petitioner is the violation of the aforesaid Rules which are nothing but rules framed to enable the employer to retain the service of those persons who may remain fit even after the age of superannuation. It has been argued before us that the impugned order of retirement mentioned in the petition amounts to removal. Is it so 2 The petitioner has stated that he has already reached the age of 55 years. It is, therefore, patent that he has reached the age of superannuation. It is well‑settled that an order of retirement after the age of superannuation of a person employed in the service of Pakistan does not amount to either dismissal or removal. This proposition is clear. Therefore, the grievance of the petitioner virtually amounts to this that 8 proper indulgences ‑have not been given to the petitioner in accordance with the aforesaid Rules. This is a matter on which this Court is not, according to us, empowered to pass an order under Article 98(2) of the Constitution in view of the provisions of sub‑Article (3)(b) of Article 98.
The petition is, therefore, rejected.
.‑I agree.
A. E.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer