Case Details

Citation(s)
1995 SLD 725 = 1995 CLC 476
High Court (AJ&K)
Writ Petition No. 65 of 1994, decided on 6th October, 1994
Presented By: Before Syed Manzoor Hussain Gillani, J
M. Tabasum Aftab AM for Petitioner. Khawaja Abdus Samad for
Respondents.

Syed MUHAMMAD AKRAM SHAH---Petitioner

VERSUS

DIRECTOR-GENERAL, HEADQUARTERS SPECIAL COMMUNICATION ORGANISATION and another---Respondents

Law:

Section:

  Telegraph and Telephone Manual, Vol.VI--- ----Chap.1, R.8(ii)---Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), S. 44---Disconnection of telephone installed at the office of petitioner on account of default in payment of dues outstanding against the telephone installed at his residence---Constitutional petition in the nature of mandamus for restoration of telephone installed at the office of petitioner---Entitlement to restoration of said telephone---Petitioner. was not responsible for payment of outstanding amount when specified telephone was not in his use for office or residence (having been earlier disconnected for. default) and was in fact bound to clear the outstanding amount due against him only---Not the number (of telephone) but the subscriber in whose use the number was, would be responsible for clearing outstanding amount---Petitioner did not fall in the category of defaulters---Authority had acted without lawful authority in holding the petitioner defaulter and liable for action under R. 8(ii) of Telegraph and Telephone Manual, VO1.VI---Authority was directed to restore telephone in question, forthwith. Ballentine's Law Dictionary and Black's Law Dictionary rel.   Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974)--- ----S. 44---Civil servant filing Constitutional petition without permission of Government concerned---Locus standi---Constitutional petition could be filed by any aggrieved party---Civil servant (petitioner) being aggrieved by action of respondent was competent to invoke Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court---Remedy under the Constitution being extraordinary the moment High Court assumes jurisdiction in such matter, it would have discretion to- see whether relief claimed should be granted or not---Benefit of relief under S. 44 of the Constitution, though flow in favour of a party, yet it is actually the command of the law to which the public authority is ordered to adhere to and the rule of law is restored---Where public authority had exceeded its limits in its judgment and knowledge, Court was obliged to set the course of law straight. M. Tabasum Aftab AM for Petitioner. Khawaja…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register