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.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. K‑20 of 1970, decided on 13th April 1970.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Karachi Bench, dated the 4th March 1970, in Civil Revision No. 41 of 1969).
O. XXXIX, r. 2‑Government servant‑Suit for declaration that removal from service illegal Temporary injunction issued restraining Government from removing plaintiff from service‑Suit filed after about one month from date of order of removal from service and order of removal having become effective‑Injunction, held, should not have been issued in circumstances.
Muhammad Zubair, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Maqbool Ahmad, Advocate‑ on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondent.
Date of hearing : 13th April 1970.
‑This petition for special leave to appeal is directed against the order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Karachi Bench, in Revision Application No. 41 of 1969, dated the 4th March 1970. By this order, a learned Single Judge of the High Court set aside the injunction order issued in favour of the petitioner.
The petitioner, who was an Assistant in the office of the Director, Basic Democracy, was charge‑sheeted for doing private business by purchasing a taxi‑car without Government permission. An Inquiry Officer was appointed and the petitioner, on final report, was dismissed from service. The petitioner filed Suit No. 60 of 1968, in the Court of Civil Judge, First Class, Khairpur for a declaration that the order of dismissal was illegal. During the pendency of the suit he prayed for injunction restraining the Government‑respondent from removing him from service. The learned Civil Judge granted him injunction in these terms. This order was also upheld by the District Judge, Khairpur. The Provincial Government filed a revision before the High Court of West Pakistan, Karachi Bench, and the learned Single Judge set aside the order and allowed the revision. The petitioner seeks permission to file an appeal against the said order.
In support of the petition, Mr. Muhammad Zubair, learned counsel for the petitioner, has contended that the petitioner was removed from service on the 7th May 1968, but he was informed later on and received payment of his salary till the 31st May 1968. According to the petitioner, he is still in Government service and, therefore, the learned Courts below were perfectly justified in issuing a temporary injunction restraining the respon dent from removing the petitioner from service. The contention of the learned counsel has no force. The petitioner was removed from service on the 7th May 1968. He filed his suit on the 4th June 1968, and by this time the order of removal had become effective. In these circumstances, the trial Court and the learned District Judge should not have issued any injunction because the order of removal had become effective. Even other wise no irreparable loss will be caused to the petitioner. In case he succeeds in his suit, he will be considered as still in Government service and will be entitled to recover his emolu ments from the Government. There is no force in the petition which is dismissed.
Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer