Case Details

Citation(s)
1974 SLG 249 1974 SLD 249 1974 SCMR 535
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 85 of 1965, decision dated: 17th January 1968. dates of hearing: 12th and 17th January 1966.(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 5th January 1965, in Wr
A. R. CORNELIUS, C.J., S. A. RAHMAN, FAZLEAKBAR, HAMOODUR REHMAN AND MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, JJ
S. Ghias Muhammad, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (M. B. Zaman, Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by Iftikhar-ud-Din Ahmad, Attorney for Petitioner. Manzoor Qadir, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by M. Siddiq, Senior Attorney for Respond

GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN

VS

A. M. KHAN LEGHARI, C. S. P., MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE, WEST PAKISTAN, LAHORE

Law:

Section:

Constitution of Pakistan (1962)----Art. 178 [as amended by Constitution (Third Amendment) Act (XV of 1965)) read with Art. 185--Compulsory retirement-Com­pulsory retirement of member of All-Pakistan Service under Art. 178(4)(a)-Consultation with Central Public Service Commission necessary to make it effective-Exception: as otherwise provided by President after consulting Commission-No such consultation made-New law enacted and Court although could take account of q, provisions of new law enacted during pendency of proceedings, yet impugned notice not relatable to action under new law and new law not validating action already taken, new law, in circumstances, held, of no assistance-High Court's order declaring notice proposing to retire public servant compulsorily of no legal effect maintained-Civil Service Regulation, Art. 465-A, Note 1. No doubt, when a proceeding is pending in the Supreme Court the Court can take into account the provisions of a new law enacted during the pendency thereof and grant relief accordingly. But in this case even if this change in the law is taken into account, it will not validate the action already taken against the respondent, for, even under the amended provisions of Article 178 of the Constitution the action that has to be taken is to be subject to the provisions of Articles 185 and 186. Under Article 185 in case or a compulsory retirement under paragraph (a) of clause (4) of Article 178 consultation with the Central Public Service Commission appears to be necessary except to the extent otherwise provided by the President after consulting the Commission in the case of persons belonging to the All-Pakistan Services. No such consultation has been made and the notice challenged in the High Court is clearly not relateable to action under the new law. In the circumstance, even the new law will not be of any assistance in the present case. Sayeedur Rehman v. Chief Election Commissioner, Dacca and others P L D 1965 S C 157 ref. JUDGMENT HAMOODUR RAHMAN, J.-This petition has been filed by the Govern­ment of Pakistan for special leave to appeal from the judgment and order of a Special Bench consisting of three learned Judges of the High…
🔒
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