Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199, 175F(1)(c)

Law: Establishment of Office of Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) Order (I of 1983)

Section: 9(2), 29, 32

 Summary The Court upheld the High Court’s decision and held that the Wafaqi Mohtasib had no jurisdiction to entertain the petitioner’s complaint relating to pension (a service matter), as such matters are expressly barred under Article 9(2) of the Establishment of the Office of Wafaqi Mohtasib Order, 1983. Consequently, all orders passed by the Mohtasib were coram non judice (without lawful authority). The High Court rightly exercised jurisdiction under Article 199 to set aside such void orders, and neither consent of parties nor undertaking can confer jurisdiction where none exists.  Tag Line “Service matters lie outside Ombudsman’s jurisdiction; consent cannot cure lack of jurisdiction.” ORDER; Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, J.- The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 175F(1)(c) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (‘Constitution’), to impugn the legality of the judgment dated 21.10.2025 (‘impugned judgment’) passed by the Peshawar High Court, Abbottabad Bench (‘High Court’), whereby a writ petition filed by respondent No.1, the Telephone Industries of Pakistan (‘T.I.P.’), under Article 199 of the Constitution was accepted, and the orders dated 28.03.2022 and 04.06.2023 passed by the Wafaqi Mohtasib (‘respondent No.3’), as well as the order dated 08.06.2023 passed by the President of Pakistan (‘respondent No.2’) in favour of the present petitioner, were set aside. The factual background of the present controversy, as set out in the petition, is that the petitioner served in the T.I.P., a wholly owned subsidiary of the Federal Government, for over thirty-five years with an unblemished service record, dedicating his best years, skill, and loyalty to building the institution. Upon his retirement on 31.03.1998, he became entitled to pensionary benefits in accordance with the Executive…