Find a Lawyer

Writ Petition No. 328 of 1956, under Article 170 of the Constitution of Pakistan, decided on 15th November 1956.

S. 240 (3)‑Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 181 (2)‑Order reverting from officiating appointment as S. D. O. to substantive post of overseer without show‑cause notice‑Illegal‑Civil Service Rules, Vol. 1, r. 14.13 read with r. 14.10.

The petitioner was reverted from an officiating appointment as S. D. O. to his substantive post of Overseer without being given a reasonable opportunity to show cause against his reversion. The officiating appointment as S. D. O. was not conditioned by any fixed period of time and it was not denied that officials junior to petitioner in service were still officiating as S. D. O.'s.

Held, that the order of reversion without affording a reasonable opportunity to show cause against the proposed action was illegal by virtue of section 240 of the Government of India Act, 1935 (now Article 181 of the Constitution) and it was also contrary to the provisions of Civil Service Rule 14.13 read with rule 14.10, Volume 1.

The High Court issued a direction that the petitioner be re‑instated as S. D. O. with effect from the date of his reversion and be continued in that post till such time as he could be legitimately reverted, if so found necessary, after due process of law.

Muhammad Iqbal for Petitioner.

S. A. Mahmood for Respondent. ,

The petitioner was admittedly reverted from an officiating appointment as S. D. O. to his substantive post of Overseer in 1952 without being given a reasonable opportunity to show cause against his reversion. He has been protesting ever since. The officiating appoint ment as S. D. O. was not conditioned by any fixed period of time and it is not denied that officials junior to petitioner in service are still officiating as S. D. O.'s. Even after his reversion the petitioner seems to have been subjected to 'two inquiries but he was exonerated. His latest representation on the Departmental file is dated the 22nd April 1956 and still Government has not seen it fit to reinstate him though the illegality of Government's action in reverting him was emphasised. The order of reversion without affording a reasonable opportunity to show cause against the proposed action was clearly illegal by virtue of section 240 of the Government of India Act, 1935 (now Article 181 of the Constitution) and it was also contrary to the provisions of Civil Service Rule 14.13 read with Rule 14.10, Volume I To top all it is revealed that petitioner has not even been paid his emoluments as an Overseer for the last four years for want of completion of entries in his Service Book. This is a scandalous state of affairs and we hope the authorities concerned will take due notice of it. We direct that the petitioner be reinstated as S. D. O. with effect from 12th September 1952 when he was illegally reverted and be continued in that post till such time as he can be‑‑ legitimately reverted, if so found necessary, after due process of law. The petitioner will be entitled to his costs against the res pondent in this case.

A. H. Petition accepted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.