| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 2033 2016 SLD 2033 2016 PLJ 252 |
W.P. Nos. 10706 & 11666 of 2015, heard on 2.9.2015. Heard on: 2.9.2015.
MIRZA VIQAS RAUF, JUSTICE
Mr. Muhammad Ghias-ul-Haq Sheikh, Advocate for Petitioners. Ch. Saleem Akhtar Warraich, Advocate/Legal Advisor for
Respondents No. 2 to 5.
ALI MAJEED AND others
VS
WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (WAPDA) THROUGH IT CHAIRMAN WAPDA HOUSE, LAHORE AND 4 others--RespondentS
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 11,2
Constitution of Pakistan, 1973---.--- ---.---Art. 199---.---Constitution petition---.---Appointment on contract basis---.---Process of appointment---.---Termination from service---.---Challenge to---.---Process of appointment as well as termination letters of petitioners were issued on same date and at time of filing petitions, challenging termination letteRs. petitioners were well conversant with fact of new appointments---.---Petitioners however did not challenge process of appointments and now after dismissal of their civil petition by way of they have thrown a fresh challenge to recruitment process in order to achieve their goal which they failed in their first attempt. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908)---.--- ---.---O. 11, R. 2---.---Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 199---.---Constitutional proceedings---.---Termination orders were challenged---.---There is no cavil that provisions of CPC are applicable to constitutional proceedings and in that way, principles enshrined in CPC are fully attracted---.---Nature of proceedings does not necessarily depend on nature of jurisdiction of Court invoked---.---Constitutional petition has been filed under Art. 199 of Constitution wherein some assertions for enforcement of civil rights have been made, therefore, same would be civil proceedings---.---Since petitioners while challenging their termination orders relinquished claim to extent of second limb i.e. recruitment process so they are now precluded to agitate their claim to that extent in terms of Order II Rule 2 of CPC. Equity---.--- ---.---Principle---.---Process of recruitment---.---Malafide and favoritism---.---Petitioners had invoked Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court which was always discretionary and based on principles of equity---.---It was manifest from available material that petitioneRs. after being unsuccessful in their first attempt were now trying to dislodge whole process of recruitment on plea that it was tainted with malafide and favoritism. Principle of Laches---.--- ---.---Though principles of laches cannot be treated as absolute hurdle in each and every case in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction but when delay in…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492