Case Details

Citation(s)
1959 SLG 392 1959 SLD 392 1959 PLD 276
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 26-D of 1958, decided on 21st May 1959.
MUHAMMAD MUNIR, C.J., M. SHAHABUDDIN AND A. R. CORNELIUS, JJ
B. A. Siddiky, Advocate General East Pakistan (A. Hye Chowdhury Advocate Supreme Court with him), instructed by t. N. M. Nasir-ud-Din, Attorney for Appellants. A. K. M. Nurul Islam, Advocate Supreme Court, instructed by A. Wadud Mia, Attorney for Responde

THE PROVINCE OF EAST PAKISTAN and others --Appellants

VS

MUHAMMAD ABDU MIAH--Respondent

Law:

Section:

Constitution of Pakistan (1956), Art. 181-Confirniation of Officer A by District Judge as Serishtedar-Set aside by Judicial Secretary on appeal of rival officer M-Art. 181 not attracted to reversion of A Writ issued by High Court in A's favour recalled by Supreme Court-Government's orders in service matters-Necessity of careful examination by Courts before setting aside-Bengal Sub­ordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 19315, rr. 18 and 20. Officer A, a stenographer, was appointed Serishtedar by the District Judge and placed on one year's probation. An appeal was preferred by a rival officer M against A's appointment beyond the six mouths' limitation period. Under the rules [r. 18. Bengal Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 19361 such an appeal could be, and was withheld by the District Judge, but the Judicial Secretary acting under r.20 entertained the appeal and after setting aside the order of A's appointment and subsequent confirmation, ordered that a suitable officer be appointed as Serishtedar after considering seniority and efficiency. The High Court, on A's writ petition, set aside the Judicial Secretary's order by a mandamus. Held, (re-calling the writ on Government's appeal) that the High Court, in issuing the writ did not place the correct interpreta­tion either upon the order of the District Judge in favour of A or upon the Judicial Secretary's appellant order setting aside that order. Judicial Secretary's order was not to be construed merely as an order reverting A but as an order setting aside the District Judge's order on the ground that it had not been made in compliance with the relevant Rules and-that a fresh order should be made in accordance with such Rules. There was nothing in the order, which could preclude the selection of A. The provisions of Article 181 of the late Constitution were not attracted by such an order. Moreover, in construing the District Judge's order confirming A as his Sherishtedar, as if it were an order giving absolute and permanent right to A to occupy the post of Sherishtedar, in terms of that order, the learned Judges had overlooked the fact that under the relevant Rules, the very fact of…
🔒
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