Case Details

Citation(s)
1993 SLG 1376 1993 SLD 1376 1993 PLC 540
Sindh High Court
First Appeal No. 31 of 1990, decided on 10th January, 1993.
NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI, 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

DIRECTOR-GENERAL, CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY, KARACHI

VS

AZIZUR-RAB SIDDIQUI

Law:

Section:

(a) Pakistan Civil Aviation Authority Ordinance (XXX of 1982)--- ----S. 14---Fundamental Rules, F.R. 23---Handbook of Drawing and Disbursing Officers, para. 7.47---Respondent was Grade-18 Officer in the defunct department of Civil Aviation; consequent upon establishment of Civil Aviation Authority his services were transferred to said Authority---Director Finance, Civil Aviation Authority fixed respondent's pay in Pay Group-9 in accordance with relevant rules---Appellant Authority, however, did not comply with the order of Director Finance---Respondent's entitlement to pay and allowances as fixed by Director Finance of Appellant Authority---Validity---Pay fixed by Director Finance was in accordance with the spirit of law and respondent should have been paid as per said fixation, especially when identical case of another employee whose pay had been similarly fixed by Director Finance had been accepted by the appellant authority---Respondent's pay as fixed by Director Finance of Appellant Authority was correct and respondent was entitled to his pay at that rate; he was similarly entitled to re-calculation, pension and commutation on the basis of last pay after grant of annual increment. (b) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Art. 114---Estoppel, principle of---Estoppel is a rule of evidence which deals with the question of fact and not of right [Estoppel]. Estoppel is rule by which a person, under certain circumstances would not be permitted to plead the contrary of a fact or state of things, which earlier he proclaimed. A party who had not been misled by any such declaration or act of the other party could not implore assistance for the applicability of doctrine of estoppel, which could not operate against the provision of a statute. It is a rule of evidence and deals with the question of fact and not of right. Mere signing an undertaking would not debar the respondent from claiming his rights conferred upon him by a statute. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 34---Entitlement to interest---Respondent had claimed his dues amounting to specified sum---Respondent in his statement before Court had claimed specified amount---Respondent's suit was not…
🔒
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