Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 2167 2021 SLD 2167 2021 PLJ 256
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.A. No. 178 of 2020, decided on 3.2.2021, Date of hearing: 3.2.2021. (Against judgment dated 07.11.2019 of Peshawar High Court, Peshawar, passed in Civil Revision No. 127-B of 2016).
GULZAR AHMED, HCJ, IJAZ-UL-AHSAN, JUSTICE, SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, JUSTICE
Mr. Atif Ali Khan, Addl. AG, KP for Appellants.

GOVERNMENT OF KPK THROUGH SECRETARY ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, PESHAWAR AND OTHErs

VS

LATIF ULLAH KHAN

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 42,55

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 185(3)

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 115

Specific Relief Act, 1877 (I of 1877)-- ----Ss. 42 55--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 185(2)--Suit for declaration and mandatory injunction--Decreed--Appeal--Dismissed--Revision petition--Dismissed--Application for post of PST--Recruitment policy--Preference over other candidates--Non-appointment of petitioner--Non-existence of recruitment policy--Non-inclusion of additional marks--Challenge to--Under recruitment policy, a R.I.T.E. diploma holder is to be given preference over other candidate--It is pertinent to note that such preference shall only be given when candidate has equal marks as other competing candidate on merit cannot be given preference over candidates appointed against respective posts when his overall marks were significantly lower than those who were appointed on merit--Marks obtained by Respondent were 51.89 and even if additional five marks for experience were added, his overall mark would be 56.89--On other hand, candidates who have been appointed against respective posts have obtained 67.832, 58.84, and 58.826 marks respectively--Therefore, even if Respondent was granted additional five marks, he would still not have similar marks as those of three candidates who have been appointed--None of grounds on basis of which Appellant was ordered to appoint Respondent against post of PST are maintainable--Therefore, Peshawar High Court has seriously erred in law by dismissing Civil Revision Petition filed by Appellant--Appeal allowed. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908)-- ----S. 115--Supervisory jurisdiction--Supervisory jurisdiction of High Court in a civil revision petition is purely discretionary and rather limited. JUDGMENT Ijaz-ul-Ahsan, J.- Through the instant Appeal by leave of the Court, the Appellants have challenged the judgment of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar dated 7.11.2019 (hereinafter referred to as the Impugned Judgment) whereby a Revision Petition (C.R. No. 127-B of 2016) filed by them was dismissed. 2. Briefly stated the facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are that the Appellants advertised various posts of Primary School Teachers (PST) in the Daily Aaj newspaper, dated 16.10.2008, inviting applications…
🔒
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