Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 2141 2017 SLD 2141 2017 YLR 611
Peshawar High Court
W.P. No. 838-D of 2015, decision & hearing Dated: 24-05-2016.
MUHAMMAD GHAZANFAR KHAN, JUSTICE, HAIDER ALI KHAN, JUSTICE
Saleemullah Khan Ranazai for Petitioners. Rustam Khan Kundi, Barrister Armaghan Ashfaq and Adnan Ali, A.A.G. for
Respondents.

IQBAL HUSSAIN AND OTHErs

VS

P.D.K.P. SADP AND OTHERS

Law:

Section:

Constitution of Pakistan--- ----Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Maintainability---Factual controversy---Scope---Factual controversy could not be adjudged without recording pro and contra evidence---Constitutional petition was not maintainable. Pakistan Red Crescent Society and another v. Syed Nazir Gillani PLD 2005 SC 806 = 2005 PLC (C.S.) 1264 rel. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: MUHAMMAD GHAZANFAR KHAN, JUSTICE:---.--- Through instant writ petition, the petitioners seek direction to respondents to extend their services till completion of Project as per terms and conditions of the contract agreement. 2. Brief facts of the case are that respondents invited applications through publication in newspaper for different posts in the Project throughout Province and Iqbal Hussain etc. (the present petitioners) applied to the posts mentioned against their names. After due process, they were appointed and the period was duly extended upto 30.10.2015. In the contract agreement it has specifically mentioned that extension will be given till the life of Project and the Project is still going on but with mala fide intention the respondents have only extended the period of petitioners till 30.10.2015, hence they filed instant writ petition. Comments were called from respondents, which was filed by them. 3. At the very outset learned counsel for respondents raised preliminary objection qua maintainability of instant writ petition by maintaining that the Project is funded by Multinational Donors under the control of World Bank and neither is public organ nor is controlled either by the Central or Provincial Government and hence immune from proceeding under writ jurisdiction. Learned counsel for respondents also referred to section 8 of the International Monetary Fund and Bank Act, 1950 (Act No. XLIII of 1950), according to which all governors, executive directors, alternates, officers and employees of the fund shall be immune from legal process with respect to acts performed by them in their official capacity except when the fund waives this immunity. He further contended that even if it is held that writ petition is competent, even then the question will arise that whether…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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