Case Details

Citation(s)
1984 SLG 1810 1984 SLD 1810 1984 PLC 1316
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 11812 of 1980, decided on 6th March, 1982.
IRSHAD AHMAD KHAN, J

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

A. D. ANWAR

VS

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973)- -- S. 13 (ii) read with Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199 and Provisional Constitution Order (1 of 1981), Art. 13-Write petition-Retirement after 25 years service qualifying for pension-' Impugned in writ petition on ground inter alia that notification made effective retrospectively-Petition, held, abated in terms of Art. 13 of Provisional Constitution Order, 1981. (b) Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973)- -- S. 13 (ii) read with Constitution of Pakistan (1973,) Art. 199 and Provisional Constitution! Order (1 of 1981), Art. 13-Writ jurisdiction-Retirement after completion of 25 years service quali­fying for pension-Order passed by competent authority (President of Pakistan)-Challenged in writ petition on grounds of mala fide- No specific allegations of mala fide against competent authority ­Persons for whose benefit impugned order allegedly passed mala fide not impleaded--Held: In absence of such persons grounds of mala fide would not be tenable-High Court. in circumstances disposing of writ petition as having abated in terms of Art, 13 of Provisional Constitution Order, 1981. Saeed Ahmad Khan v. Federation of Pakistan P L D 1974 S C 151 rel. Muhammad Saeed Akhtar for Petitioner. Iftikhar Ahmad, Deputy A.-G. for Federation of Pakistan. JUDGMENT This writ petition calls in question the validity of the Notification, dated 2nd of September, 1980, whereby, in the exercise of the powers conferred by clause (ii) of section 13 of the Civil Servants Act, 1973 (LXXI of 1973), the President was pleased to direct the retirement of the petitioner from service on 16th November, 1980 as he had completed 25 years of service qualifying for pension or other retirement benefits. 2. The impugned notification has been assailed on various grounds taken in the writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, wishes to contest the petition only on two-fold grounds. Firstly, that the impugned notification of retirement is mala fide for reasons stated in para­graphs 9 (x) and (xi) of the writ petition which read thus :- (x) That Mr. Ghaus Bux Raisani, Taj Muhammad Jamali and Dr. Nasir Sheikh are the influential persons and as…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492