| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2022 SLG 1491 2022 SLD 1491 2022 PLJ 77 |
Sindh High Court
C.P. No. D-2650 of 2019, decided on 17.5.2019.
MUHAMMAD ALI MAZHAR AND AGHA FAISAL, JJ.
M/s. Ghulam Asghar Pathan and Irshad Ali Shar, Advocates for Petitioner. Petitioner is also present. Mr. Salman Talibuddin, Advocate General Sindh. Mr. Mukesh Kumar G. Karara, Advocate for
Respondent No. 3. Mr. Hatim Aziz Solangi, Additional MIT-I, Sindh
C.P. No. D-2650 of 2019, decided on 17.5.2019.
MUHAMMAD ALI MAZHAR AND AGHA FAISAL, JJ.
M/s. Ghulam Asghar Pathan and Irshad Ali Shar, Advocates for Petitioner. Petitioner is also present. Mr. Salman Talibuddin, Advocate General Sindh. Mr. Mukesh Kumar G. Karara, Advocate for
Respondent No. 3. Mr. Hatim Aziz Solangi, Additional MIT-I, Sindh
Ms. SABAVSPROVINCE OF SINDH through Secretary Law and 2 others
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Constitution of Pakistan, 1973-- ----Art. 199--Constitutional petition--Recruitment for post of Additional District and Sessions Judge--Conducting of first preliminary test--Doubtful Credibility of preliminary test--Leakage of Question Paper--Conflict of interest--Cancellation of test and its result--Non-officially announcement of result--Respondent highlighted cause of scrapping first preliminary test which seems to be quite reasonable and logical had appeared for selection to post of ADSJ--Due to leakage of paper, entire sacrosanctity and credibility of first preliminary test has become doubtful, dubious and contaminated--This impropriety and illegality cannot be ignored so best way was to cancel results of preliminary test in larger interest of entire judicial system of which this Court is custodian and guardian being apex Court of province--Allowing petitioner at this stage to sit in second written test without qualifying retest will amount sheer discrimination to those candidates who also sit in preliminary test and after cancellation they again sit in retake without any demur, doubts or objections--Except petitioner no other candidate has come up to challenge cancellation of earlier test and holding of retest/retake--Decision taken for retest was proportionate, well balanced and harmonious and it does not stand to reason to interfere--No vested right created in favour of petitioner--No privilege or benefit can be claimed by petitioner on basis of alleged marks secured in tainted process which has lost its neutrality--We do not find any illegality and impropriety in decision taken for retest--Petition dismissed. Ref. 2005 SCMR 445. Requirement of Proportionality-- ----Whereas proportionality requires Court to judge whether action taken was really needed as well as whether it was within range of courses of action which could reasonably be followed.[P. 90] E (1948) 1 KB 223 ref. M/s. Ghulam Asghar Pathan and Irshad Ali Shar, Advocates for Petitioner. Petitioner is also present. Mr. Salman Talibuddin, Advocate General Sindh. Mr. Mukesh Kumar G. Karara, Advocate for Respondent No. 3. Mr. Hatim Aziz Solangi, Additional MIT-I, Sindh High Court, Karachi present.…
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