Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 74 2017 SLD 74 2017 SCMR 56
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No. 2411 of 2014 Dated 17th October, 2016. Hearing Date : 17th October, 2016.
MUSHIR ALAM AND UMAR ATA BANDIAL, JUSTICE
Muhammad Bashir Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Raja Muhammad Arif, Additional A.G. and Muhammad Akram, DDEO for
Respondents.

MUHAMMAD AKRAM

VS

. DCO, RAHIM YAR KHAN AND OTHERS --RespondentS

Law:

Section:

(a) Administration of justice--- ----Courts were sanctuaries of justice, and in exercise of authority to do ex debito justitiae, they could remedy a wrong and suppress a mischief to which a litigant was entitled. (b) Constitution of Pakistan--- ----Arts. 184(3) & 199---Constitutional jurisdiction of the Supreme Court/High Court to convert one type of proceedings into another--¬Scope---No fetters or bar could be placed on the High Court or the Supreme Court to convert and treat one type of proceeding into another and proceed to decide the matter either itself, provided it had jurisdiction over the lis before it in exercise of another jurisdiction vested in the very court, or it may remit the lis to the competent authority/forum or court for decision on merits---Courts do follow the practice of treating and or converting appeal into revisions and vice versa and constitutional petition into appeal or revision and vice versa. (c) Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act (XII of 2006)--- ----S. 16---Dismissal from service---Appeal filed before wrong forum---Limitation---Scope---Employee instead of filing departmental appeal before appellate authority as provided under S. 16 of the Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act, 2006, filed constitutional petition before the High Court---High Court sent the constitutional petition to the appellate authority and directed to treat the same as " departmental appeal" and "to decide the same on its own merits after hearing the petitioner"---Constitutional petition converted into departmental appeal, was dismissed on merits by the appellate authority, but at the same time it was observed that "that no departmental appeal under S. 16 of the Act, 2006 has ever been filed by the petitioner"---Appeal filed before the Service Tribunal was simply dismissed as barred by time---Legality---Time consumed pursuing remedy before a wrong forum in appropriate cases could always be condoned---Observation of the appellate authority that "that no departmental appeal under S. 16 of the Act, 2006 has ever been filed by the petitioner" in the facts and circumstances of the case was uncalled for and…
🔒
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