DR. ABDUL AZIZ versus FEDFRATION OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM,. ISLAMABAD
Section 20 Sindh Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973), Article 4 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Order of constitutional application in connection with payment of pension benefits, the service tribunal, in its order, directed the respondent to apply. The pensionary benefits should be recalculated. With full authorization and payment of his service, accordingly the Empire Corporation challenged that the service tribunal's decision was presented to the Supreme Court, which was rejected for illegal prosecution. It was held that in view of the dismissal of the petition, the petitioner had, in his constitutional application, entitled the decision of the service tribunal applicant, requesting the execution of the service tribunal applicant's order. And the defendants were state-controlled corporations even if as respondents I may change through the process. The privatization was nowhere to be seen, suggesting that their privatization was not taken over by the responsible authorities with respect to the applicants. The privatization agreement showed that not only was the new company taking over the responsibilities of all the respondents' employees, but that the respondents were also aware of the responsibilities involved and the litigation, Those who were to be dismissed by a new company formed through the privatization process, upon the dismissal of a civil petition for illegal proceedings by the Supreme Court, the decision of the service tribunal would not be integrated into the court's ruling, but the service tribunal Implementation of the decision of the service will continue and the decision of the service tribunal will continue
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010
