Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLG 2507 2026 SLD 2507 = 2026 PLC 465
Sindh High Court
C.P. No.D-7335 of 2019, decided on 2nd May, 2025.
Presented By: Muhammad Karim Khan Agha and Adnan-ul-Karim Memon, JJ
Ehsanullah for Petitioner.        Malik Naeem Iqbal and Talha Abbasi for
Respondent No.2.

Syed NASIR ABBAS ABIDI

VERSUS

PAKISTAN DEFENCE OFFICERS HOUSING AUTHORITY and another

Law: Pakistan Defence Housing Authority Service Rules, 2008

Section: R. 8 (b) (i)

 Service Rules of Employees of Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Authority, 2008 R. 8 (b) (i)---Employee of Pakistan Defence Housing Authority---Services, dispensing of---Powers---Grievance of the petitioner, who was holding contract position of UDC in the Pakistan Defence Housing Authority (PDHA), was that his services were wrongly dispensed with---Validity---At the time services of the petitioner were dispensed with through the impugned letter, R. 8b(i) of Service Rules of Employees of Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Authority, 2008 was in field ; which Rule reads that the Administrator may dispense with the services of an employee by giving him one month's notice or one month's pay in lieu thereof---Similarly, an employee may resign from service by giving one month's notice by paying one month's pay in lieu thereof---Thus, the services of the petitioner were legally dispensed with under R. 8(b)(i) of the Service Rules for Employees of PDOHA-2008---No illegality in the dispensment of the services of the petitioner was found---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.        Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Authority v. Mrs. Itrat Sajjad Khan and others 2017 SCMR 2010 and C.P. No.D-838 of 2014 distinguished.        ORDER        MUHAMMAD KARIM KHAN AGHA, J.---The main grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner was holding contract position of UDC in the Pakistan Defence Housing Authority ('PDHA') and his services were dispensed with on 08th July, 2011 under Rule 8b(i) of Service Rules of Employees of Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Authority-2008 (`PDOHA-2008`), with one month pay in lieu of one month notice period in writing (the impugned letter) and he now seeks re-instatement as according to him the impugned letter was passed without lawful authority. 2.    We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3.    It is noted that the petitioner s services were dispensed with on 08th July, 2011. At that time, the service rules of employees of PDOHA-2008 and in…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register