Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 456 2020 SLD 456 2020 CLD 210
Lahore High Court
W.P. No. 1767 of 2019, decision dated: 19-11-2019.
SHAMS MEHMOOD MIRZA, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Zaka ur Rehman and Sheraz Zaka
Respondent(s) by: Hafiz Tariq Naseem, Jawad Tariq Naseem and Muhammad Salman Ullah Khan No. 7. Sardar Qasim Hassan Khan, Assistant Advocate-General Nos. 3, 4 and 5.

SHAMS MEHMOOD MIRZA, JUSTICE

VS

BOARD OF DIRECTORS THROUGH CHAIRMAN Lahore TRANSPORT COMPANY AND 6 OTHERS Faisal Hanif Nos. 1, 2 and 6.

Law: Public Sector Companies (Corporate Governance) Rules 2013

Section: R.5(2)

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199,199(1)(ii)(b)

Law: Public Sector Companies (Appointment of Chief Executive) Guidelines, 2015

Section: ScheduleI,II

(a) Public Sector Companies (Corporate Governance) Rules, 2013--- ----R. 5(2)---Public Sector Companies (Appointment of Chief Executive) Guidelines, 2015, Schedules I & II---Appointment of Chief Executive---Procedure---Violations---Petitioner was aggrieved of appointment of respondent as Chief Executive of public sector company on grounds that her appointment was violative of required procedure---Validity---Action of nominating candidates by Board to line ministry was culmination of larger process of selection envisaged by Schedule I to Public Sector Companies (Appointment of Chief Executive) Guidelines, 2015---Recommendation of two names by Board was in clear violation of Public Sector Companies (Appointment of Chief Executive) Guidelines, 2015 which required Board to recommend minimum of three candidates to line ministry for appointment to post of Chief Executive---Recommendation of three names by Board out of short-listed candidates was a mandatory requirement which could not be circumvented by Board by sending names of only two candidates to Chief Minister for appointment---Process for initiating case for appointment to post of Chief Executive of company was not in accordance with manner laid down by Public Sector Companies (Appointment of Chief Executive) Guidelines, 2015 and such aspect of matter completely escaped attention of authorities---High Court declared appointment of respondent to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect---Constitutional petition was allowed in circumstances. Barrister Sardar Muhammad v. Federation of Pakistan and others PLD 2013 Lah. 343 rel. (b) Administration of justice--- ----When law directs that a particular proceedings would be taken in a particular manner, purport of wording of statute would be taken as indicating intention of lawmaker to exact a strict compliance with its terms. 6 Bac, Abr. 377 rel. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: SHAMS MEHMOOD MIRZA, J.--- This writ petition calls into question the appointment of respondent No.7 to the post of Chief Executive Officer, Lahore Transport Company (the Company) on 23.05.2018. 2. Learned counsel submits that the appointment of respondent No.7 was made in violation of…
🔒
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