Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 2183 2021 SLD 2183 2021 PLJ 333
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.A. Nos. 909 to 912 & Crl. Org. P. No. 87 of 2020, heard on 24.3.2021, Date of hearing: 24.3.2021. (On appeal against judgment dated 31.1.2020 passed by the High Court of Balochistan, Quetta, in C.P. Nos. 246/2008 & 334/2019).
GULZAR AHMED, HCJ, IJAZ UL AHSAN, JUSTICE, SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, JUSTICE
Mr. Muhammad Shoaib Shaheen, ASC for Appellant (in CAs No. 909 & 910 of 2020). Sh.Riaz-ul-Haque, ASC and Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR for Appellants (in CA No. 912 of 2020). Syed Iftikhar Hussain Gillani, Sr. ASC for
Respondents (for
Respondent Nos. 2

KHALILULLAH KAKAR AND OTHErs

VS

PROVINCIAL POLICE OFFICER, BALOCHISTAN ETC.

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 212(3)

Constitution of Pakistan, 1973-- ----Art. 212(3)--Joint seniority list of DPS--Filing of writ petition--Allowed--Issuance of joint seniority list--Civil petition--Accepted--Issuance of two separate seniority lists of DSPs--Filing of objections--During pendency of objections filing of writ petition--Allowed--Assumption of jurisdiction by High Court--Specific bar--Jurisdiction of Balochistan Service Tribunal--Question of whether there should be a joint seniority list of DSPs of all cadres or it has to be separated from each other depending upon nature of work--Compactness of police force--Challenge tos being employees of Balochistan Police Force are civil servants and matter pertaining to issuance of joint seniority lists specifically relates to their terms and conditions of service, which particularly rests within jurisdiction of Balochistan Service Tribunal--High Court mainly assumed jurisdiction on ground that at time of passing of impugned , Balochistan Service Tribunal was not functional--Service Tribunal was not non-functional for an indefinite period--Therefore, it can be safely said that very institution of this Constitutional petitions was against Constitutional mandate--It is an established principle of law that High Courts assume their jurisdiction through particular law conferring a particular jurisdiction--Article 212(2) of Constitution specifically places an embargo on all other Courts except Service Tribunal to grant an injunction, make any order or ‘entertain’ any proceedings in respect of any matter relating to terms and conditions of service even if they are mala fide, ultra vires or coram non judice--It has time and again been said, by this Court that tendency to bypass remedy provided under relevant statue by resorting to constitutional jurisdiction is to be discouraged so that legislative intent is not defeated--Same is meant to be exercised in extraordinary circumstances and not in run of mill cases--Even otherwise, we have noted that respondents had not approached learned High Court after exhausting remedy of filing departmental appeal--Therefore, we are compelled, to observe that very constitutional petitions were not maintainable before…
🔒
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