| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 3640 2025 SLD 3640 = 2025 SHC 1525 |
CP No D- 3388 of 2019
Justice Mohammad Karim Khan Agha Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Mr. Sajjad Ahmed advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Afsheen Aman advocate for the respondent
(Ashfaq Ahmed & another v Federation of Pakistan & others)
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Summary:
The petitioner, a Pakistan Railways employee appointed in 2000, requested upgradation to Grade 16 (BS-16, selection grade) citing that his juniors had already been promoted and relying on precedent from a similar case. The respondents argued that the petitioner did not meet the required criteria due to insufficient length of service before the discontinuation of the selection grade in 2001. The court observed that the petitioner’s claim was time-barred under the doctrine of laches, as the cause of action accrued in 2001 but was filed in 2019. Since the petition was not supported by existing policy and delayed excessively, the court dismissed the petition under Article 199 of the Constitution.
Core Points:
- Petitioner sought upgradation to BS-16 based on service and juniors’ promotion.
- Petitioner appointed on August 7, 2000; length of service did not meet criteria under Finance Division’s O.M. dated June 30, 1996.
- BS-16 selection grade discontinued on September 4, 2001.
- Petitioner could not complete required 3 years of service before discontinuation.
- Reference to Lahore High Court precedent (Imran Ahmed case) was examined; that claim was rejected.
- Petition filed in 2019 for a cause of action accruing in 2001 (laches doctrine applies).
- Petition not covered by current policy of respondents.
- Petition dismissed under Article 199 of the Constitution for being time-barred and not maintainable.
Law and Section Table:
| Law/Doctrine | Description | Relevance in Case |
|---|---|---|
| Doctrine of Laches | Legal principle barring claims brought after unreasonable delay | Petition filed after 18 years delay; dismissed |
| Article 199 of Constitution | Jurisdiction of High Courts for writs | Petition dismissed as not maintainable under this |
| Finance Division O.M. June 30, 1996 | Official Memorandum setting criteria for BS-16 selection grade | Petitioner did not meet length of service criteria |
| Discontinuation Order (Sep 4, 2001) | Selection grade ceased to exist from this date | Petitioner could not complete required service period |
O R D E R