MUHAMMAD IQBAL KHAN and another‑‑‑Petitioners
VERSUS
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Resources, Islamabad and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents
This judgment shall deal with and decide Writ Petitions Nos.3299 of 2001, 2672 of 2001 and Writ Petition No.3300 of 2001 for being on identical questions of law and facts. Since the case was thoroughly and fully argued by the learned counsel for the parties, therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of as admitted/'Pacca' case. Under Management Trainee Scheme of Sui Northern Gas Pipelines Limited i.e. the Company, the petitioners were appointed as Management Trainees under a contract of two years. No term or guarantee was offered to the petitioners by the respondents‑company to retain or absorb any of the Trainees in its regular service. As such, on expiry of the contract period, petitioners were so intimated and their service was terminated, petitioners thereupon filed writ petitions in this Court. These writ petitions were dismissed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in limine. Petitioners challenged the said judgment before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. By order dated 1‑4‑1998, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan refused leave to petitioners with following observations: "Leave is refused with the observation that in case the respondent‑company decides to induct new trainees, the petitioners will be at liberty to apply for the post and the respondent‑company will give due consideration to the fact that the petitioners have already successfully completed the training. " On 3‑4‑2000, the respondent‑company through advertisement in the newspaper, invited applications for recruitment/selection for various posts. On 8‑4‑2000, a corrigendum to the above-said advertisement was published in the press by the respondent‑company providing that only the persons holding 1st Division throughout their academic career (starting from Matric) were qualified for the posts. Though the petitioners were not such 1st divisioners, they nevertheless sent their applications to the respondent‑company. Since petitioners did not receive any response thereto, therefore, they challenged the inaction of the respondent- company through the present writ petitions to seek execution and…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register