| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 4367 = 2026 SLD 4367 |
Federal Constitution Court of Pakistan
CPLA No. 1560 of 2025 & 1971 of 2025 [against the impugned judgment dated 13.02.2025 passed by Peshawar High Court, Bannu Bench in W.P.No.152-B/2024 & W.P.No.162-B of 2024]
Presented By: Justice Ali Baqar Najafi Justice Syed Arshad Hussain Shah
For the Petitioner (s) : Mr. Arif Ullah Khan, ASC (in CPLA No.1560/2025) Syed Iqbal Hussain Shah Gillani, ASC (in CPLA No.1971/2025) For the
Respondent(s) : Mr. Shah Faisal Ilyas, Addl. AG KPK a/w Raza Ullah AD Anti-Corruption Bannu. Date of Hearing : 24.03.2026
CPLA No. 1560 of 2025 & 1971 of 2025 [against the impugned judgment dated 13.02.2025 passed by Peshawar High Court, Bannu Bench in W.P.No.152-B/2024 & W.P.No.162-B of 2024]
Presented By: Justice Ali Baqar Najafi Justice Syed Arshad Hussain Shah
For the Petitioner (s) : Mr. Arif Ullah Khan, ASC (in CPLA No.1560/2025) Syed Iqbal Hussain Shah Gillani, ASC (in CPLA No.1971/2025) For the
Respondent(s) : Mr. Shah Faisal Ilyas, Addl. AG KPK a/w Raza Ullah AD Anti-Corruption Bannu. Date of Hearing : 24.03.2026
Bakhtullah Shah and others. In CPLA No. 1560/2025 Mrs. Syeda Anjum, Ex-DEO (Female) Bannu In CPLA No. 1971/2025 DEO Office Bannu
VERSUS
Govt. of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Chief In both petitions Secretary and others
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 185(3), 175(F)(2)
FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF PAKISTAN (Original/Appellate/Advisory Jurisdiction) JUDGMENT ALI BAQAR NAJAFI, J. Through these petitions under Article 185(3), now under 175 (F)(2) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioners have challenged the impugned judgment dated 13.02.2025 whereby the writ petitions filed by the petitioners challenging the letter dated 17.01.2024 were dismissed. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is straightaway observed that the petitioners were proceeded under E&D Rules 2011 on the following allegations:- That petitioners have not implemented the CP No.2022 dated 07.03.2018 in its true spirit while appointing/reinstating AT/TT female candidates liner on since 2010. That before appointment/re-instatement, petitioners were provided with two sets of opinion from Law deptt: according to one opinion (a) Documents submitted for appointment after cut of date of advertisement are not acceptable (b) Qualification improved during service cannot be ignored. The allegation that why the second opinion was preferred in the minutes of the meeting. That petitioners had issued appointment orders in excess as were given in the advertisement. That opportunity was provided to failed candidates in the written test.” Accordingly, the petitioners were issued the show cause notice whereupon they filed the reply and were also personally heard. They raised the objections on impartiality of the Inquiry Panel and, therefore, the petitioner No.3/Ikram Ullah Khan also filed W.P.No.128-B/2021 in which, despite passing status quo order, the disciplinary proceedings continued and although they were exonerated on 07.03.2022 yet were imposed the penalty on 17.01.2024 by the competent authority. On factual premise it…