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. 1131 of 1976, decided on 11th February, 1.981.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Punjab Administrative Tribunal, dated 10-2-1975, in Case No. 150 of 1974-2511).
-- Ss. 3 & 7 [as amended by Punjab Administrative Tribunals (Amend ment) Ordinance (IX of 1975), S. 5]-Quorum--Administrative Tribunal having consisted of two members and a Chairman, disposal of case by two members, held, not warranted by law-Section 7 authorising disposal of cases by remaining two members (no Chairman having been then appointed) having been deleted by Ordinance IX of 1975, before disposal of case in hand reference to such section, held further, of no avail.
Munir Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate -on-Record for Petitioner.
Muhammad Akram Butt, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Ijaz Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents.
Date of hearing : 11th February, 1981.
A service appeal of the petitioner was dismissed by the Punjab Administrative Tribunal on 10.2-1975, by a quorum of two members. The petitioner has come up in a petition for special leave to appeal against the same to this Court.
2. It has been argued that according to the law as contained in section 3 of the Punjab Administrative Tribunal Act IX of 1974. The Tribunal consisted of two Members and a Chairman, and that as such the disposal of the case by two Members was not warranted under that Act. The, contention seems to have merit and is fully supported from the provisions of the aforesaid section. When confronted with this situation, learned A. A.-G. (Punjab), to whom notice had been issued, submitted, that section 7 of the Act authorised disposal of a case by two Members of the Tribunal, when any of them was unable to attend or when his seat was vacant. In this case, he submitted, that as the Chairman of the Tribunal had not been appointed, therefore, according to the provisions of section 7, the remaining two Members were competent to hear this case. The conten tion has no merit. Section 7 on which reliance is being placed was deleted with effect from 8-2-1975 by the Punjab Administrative Tribunal Ordinance IX of 1975, with the result, that thereafter, two Members alone could not have disposed of the case in hand on 10-2-1975.
3. The result is that the petition is converted into an appeal and is accepted, the order of the Tribunal dated 10-2-1975 is quashed, and they are directed to redecide the appeal of the petitioner on merits. Parties to bear their own costs.
Petition accepted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer