Case Details

Citation(s)
1992 SLG 437 1992 SLD 437 1992 PLD 825
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No.K-11 of 1983, decision dated: 25-08-1992.
NASIM HASAN SHAH, MUHAMMAD RAFIQ TARAR AND WALI MUHAMMAD KHAN, JJ
K.MA. Samdani, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Manzoor Elahi, Ex-Advocate-on-Record for Appellant. Ch. ljaz Ahmad, Dy. Attorney-General instructed by Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record.

MUHAMMAD MASIHUZZAMAN-

VS

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Establishment Division and another

Law:

Section:

(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1972)------Art. 221(4)---Civil servant who had not completed 25 years of service qualifying for pension on the date from which he was retired from service could not be retired from service---Order of retirement of such civil servant from the said date was illegal and void---Reliance on a request made by civil servant and giving effect to it, in contravention of a provision made in the Constitution was impermissible. Since the civil servant had not completed 25 years of service qualifying for pension on 15-2-1973 (the date from which he was retired from service) the order directing his retirement from the said date was illegal and void. No party can circumvent the provisions of the Constitution. Accordingly, even reliance on a request made by the employee and giving effect to it, in contravention of a provision made in the Constitution, is impermissible. Indeed it is not possible to contract out of a statutory safeguard because any agreement which defeats a statutory provision, despite being in accord with wishes of a party, cannot be allowed as giving effect to it is a course which is violative of public policy and the resultant action is void in law. Hence in the present case, it was not possible for the civil servant to seek premature retirement, as this would involve a violation of the Constitutional provisions contained in the' Interim Constitution of 1972. There can be no estoppel against a statute and here the statutory instrument involved was the Constitution of the country and that it was against public policy to give effect to the request of the civil servant as . it involved a violation of a statutory safeguard namely a protection conferred on civil servants to prevent their severance from service before completing 25 years of service by a Constitutional provision. No relaxation made herein (even through the Rules of Business) was, therefore, of any avail. The action taken in this case was contrary to the provisions of the Interim Constitution of 1972 and notwithstanding that it was taken on the request of a party subsequently questioning it, the fact remained that unless the relevant provision of the Constiution itself…
🔒
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