Case Details

Citation(s)
2025 SLG 4700 2025 SLD 4700 = 2025 PLC 640
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No. 6059 of 2021, decided on 28th November, 2024. (On appeal from the Judgment, dated 18.10.2021 passed by the Lahore High Court Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur in W.P. No. 6539 of 2014).
Present: Amin-ud-Din Khan, Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, JJ
Hafiz S.A.Rehman, Senior Advocate Supreme Court along with Anis Muhammad Shahzad, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Muhammad Tariq, Aftab Alam Yasir, Advocates Supreme Court and Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent No.1.

CHAIRMAN, NADRA, NADRA HEADQUARTER, ISLAMABAD and others

VERSUS

ABDUL MAJEED and another

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 25

Law: Disabled Persons (Employment and Rehabilitation) Ordinance, 1981

Section: XL

Law: Islamabad Capital Territory Rights of Persons with Disability Act, 2020

Section: XXV

Law: Punjab Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2022

Section: XLII

Law: Sindh Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2018

Section: XLVIII

Law: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Disabled Persons (Employment and Rehabilitation) (Amendment) Act, 2012

Section: XVI

Law: Balochistan Persons with Disabilities Act, 2017

Section: II

(a)    Constitution of Pakistan-------Art. 25---Employment---Regularization of service---Disabled person--Discrimination---Petitioner/National Database Registration Authority (NADRA) was aggrieved of direction passed by High Court to regularize services of respondent/employee---Validity---Petitioner/NADRA provided job opportunities to disabled persons based on their ability and capacity to work---If a disabled person, initially appointed on a contractual basis, had performed his duties for a considerable period of time to the satisfaction of his superiors/department, then proprietary demanded that he should be regularized as a permanent employee so that he could reap all employment benefits, rather than being dragged on contractual basis perpetually---Respondent/employee was only three days short of completing required one year of service, but was denied regularization, while other similarly situated employees, who were short by a greater margin than the respondent/employee were accommodated as directed by High Court without any challenge to that judgment---Supreme Court declined to interfere in judgment passed by High Court as there was no illegality or perversity---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and leave to appeal was refused.Chairman NADRA, Islamabad, through Chairman, Islamabad and another v. Muhammad Ali Shah and others 2017 SCMR 1979; Federal Board of Revenue v. Messrs. Hub Power Company Ltd. and others PLD 2023 SC 207; NWFP Public Service Commission v. Muhammad Arif 2011 SCMR 848; Fida Hussain v. The State PLD 2002 SC 46; Pakistan Telecommunication Co. Ltd. v. Iqbal Nasir PLD 2011 SC 132; Imtiaz Ali Malik v. Mst. Surrya Begum 1979 SCMR 22; Pakistan International Airlines Corporation v. Samina Masood PLD 2005 SC 831; Accountant General for Pakistan (Revenue) through Auditor-General v. Zia Mohyud-Din PLD 2008 SC 164; Mst. Shohrat Bano v. Ismail Dada Adam Soomar 1968 SCMR 574; Punjab Employees Social Security Institution Lahore and others v. Manzoor Hussain Khan 1992 SCMR 441; Province of Punjab through Secretary Excise and Taxation, Government of Punjab v. Sargodha Textile Mills Ltd., Sargodha PLD 2005 SC 988 and…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register