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.
Before Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim and Ajmal Mian, JJ
IQAN AHMED KHURRUM AND OTHERS ‑Petitioners
versus
GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN AND 7 OTHERS‑Respondents
Constitutional Petition No. D‑953 of 1977, D‑146 & D‑849 of 1978 and D‑120 of 1979, decided on 17th February 1979.
(a) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)‑
‑‑ Ss. 3 & 4‑Appeal‑Rule varying terms and conditions of a civil servant‑Can be treated as an order for purpose of filing an appeal before Service Tribunal‑Petitioners challenging promotion orders, or claiming to have been wrongly excluded from list of promotees, or challenging appointments of others in preference to them‑Petitioners, in circumstances, held, cannot be said to have not challenged any final orders passed by Departmental authorities nor can it be urged that no final order exists so as to be taken up in appeal before Service Tribunal.‑[Civil service].
Fatal Elahi Ejaz and 20 others v. The Government of Punjab and 13 others P L D 1977 Lab. 549 and Sher Muhammad v. Director‑General of Pakistan Telephone Department and others P L D 1979 Kar. 1 ref.
(b) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)‑
‑‑ ‑ Ss. 3 & 4‑Service Tribunals‑Jurisdiction‑Object of constitu tion of Service Tribunals : To provide a forum with exclusive jurisdic tion in service matters relating to terms and conditions of civil servants‑Service Tribunals while adjudicating upon question whether impugned order affecting arms and conditions of a civil servant legal or not, held, competent to examine vires of rules or orders. [Jurisdiction].
Muhammad Hashim Khan and others v. The Province of Baluchistan and others P L D 1976 Quetta 59 ; Fazal Elahl Ejaz and 22 others v. Government of Punjab and 13 others P L D 1977 Lah. 300 ref.
(c) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)‑
Ss. 3 & 4‑Service Tribunal‑Jurisdiction‑Question whether impugned order liable to be set aside on any ground including ground of order being void‑Held, can be competently enquired into by Service Tribunal.‑[Jurisdiction].
Mujibullah Ejaz v. D, G., Telephone and Telegraph P L J 1978 Quetta 108 ref.
(d) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)‑
‑.‑ Ss. 3 & 4‑Service Tribunal‑Jurisdiction‑Questions whether impugned notifications can be challenged on ground of alleged violation of principles of natural justice and whether in fact any violation of such principle committed‑Held, fall within compass of Service Tribunal's jurisdiction.‑[Jurisdiction].
(e) Spice Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)‑ .
Ss. 3 & 4‑Service Tribunal‑Jurisdiction‑‑Contention regarding contesting officials having been given benefit of retrospectivity of impugned notifications and consequently orders passed in pursuance thereof void‑Held, within competency of Service Tribunal to decide. [Jurisdiction ].
N. A. Faruqui, Khalid M. Ishaque and Manzoor All Khan for Petitioners.
Shah Jamil Alam, Dy. Attorney‑General, Sayeed A. Shaikh, Standing Counsel, Syed Nasiruddin and Khawaja Akhtar Ali for Respondents.
Dates of hearing : 1st November 1978 ; 13th January and 3rd February 1979.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer