Article 199 General Clause Act (X of 1897), Article 21 Maintaining a Constitutional Request Advertising for Civil Service Regular Recruitment, Contract Based Appointment Lok Lostity, the Rule of Promise and the Promise of Sanctions Estoppel's theory of principle and the people affected by the locals were not attracted because the appointment was offered on a regular basis through advertising which was due to financial constraints that did not set the applicant on a regular basis. And could not be accepted as entitled by way of election. The applicant was justified in this and at a later stage, the authorities could not be allowed to take regular U-turn, the applicant could not be forced to work on a contract basis but a matter of financial compulsion. Was not accepted. Because the High Court could not release the advertisement, the petitioner from the Department of Finance could not be subjected to the department's deficiencies as the authority had to deal with the applicant under the constitutional obligation as per the law employed by the applicant on contract basis. The basis for stopping the acceptance could not be made. Permanent appointment, because of the prevailing unemployment situation in the country, the applicant had no other option but to accept the same application and to exercise his constitutional right to jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution. The truth was not lost. The use of judicial review powers against arbitrary proceedings of the executive constitution has not prevented the High Court
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2014
