Find a Lawyer

Intra Court Appeal No. 206 of 1984, decided on 14th October, 1985.

‑‑‑S. 3‑‑Civil service‑‑Intra Court appeal‑‑Competency‑‑Argument that departmental appeal as well as appeal to Service Tribunal was available only to Civil Servants and not to Government, therefore, Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 did not bar Intra Court Appeal repelled‑‑Held, Ordinance, 1972 only provided of availability of appeal and not whether appeal was available to one or to both parties it was, therefore, of no consequence that Government had no right to appeal under law applicable to civil servants.‑‑[Civil services].

S.M. Zubair, Asstt. A.‑G. for Appellants.

Mian Nusrat Ullah for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 6th October, 1985.

The Government of Punjab action on the advice of the Punjab Public Service Commission relieved Mushtai Ahmad respondent of his duties, w.e.f. 31‑8‑1977. He was then work in, as Instructor, Government Technical Teachers Training College Faisalabad. He challenged the orders before the Punjab Service Tribune and then took an appeal to the Supreme Court which was pend in when he brought Writ Petition No. 1655 of 1981. It was allowed by learned Judge in Chamber on 20‑6‑1984. The Government of Punja have appealed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge. The appeal was admitted to consider the question of jurisdiction. The matte came up for hearing on 29‑9‑1985 when the learned counsel for the respondent questioned the maintainability of the Intra Court appeal The matter was adjourned till today on the request of the learn Assistant Advocate‑General.

2. The learned Assistant Advocate‑General has argued that eve though the Civil Servants Act read with the Service Tribunal At provides for a departmental appeal as well as an appeal to the Service Tribunal yet this appeal is available only to the Civil Servants and n, to the Government and, therefore, Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 do not bar an Intra Court appeal. This argument is without force as to Law Reforms Ordinance only talks of the availability of appeal and n whether the appeal is available to one or to both the parties. Furthermore there is no question of the' Government challenging its own orders appeal. It is, therefore, of no consequence that the Government h no right to appeal under the law applicable to the civil servants.

3. The learned Assistant Advocate‑General has also argued the Intra Court Appeal is competent as the learned Single Judge h held that a writ could be issued. It is not certain whether the learn Assistant Advocate‑General is serious about this argument because it self‑defeating. The very grievance of the appellants is that the Hi Court did not have the jurisdiction to issue a writ. If this is conceded then there is no question of appealing against it.

4. In view of the above considerations, it is clear that an In Court Appeal is not competent in this case. The appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

H . B . T . Appeal dismissed,

Find a Lawyer Near You

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