Case Details

Citation(s)
1996 SLG 318 1996 SLD 318 1996 PLC 134
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 12481 of 1994, decision dated: 9-08-1995
IHSANUL HAQ CHAUDHRY, J

MUHAMMAD ZIA-ULHAQ and othersVsGOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB and othersMUHAMMAD ZIA-ULHAQ and othersVsGOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB and others

Law:

Section:

(a) Punjab Local Government and Rural Development Department Service Rules, 1981-- ----Sched., S.N. 5---Punjab Civil Servants (Appointments and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974, R. 11---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts. 212 & 199---Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), S. 4---Constitutional petition in the nature of quo warranto---Competency---Provisions of Punjab Local Government and Rural Development Department Service Rules. 1981, postulated that Executive Engineers were to be appointed 100 per cent, by promotion--Respondents' names appeared at Serial Nos. 189 and 224 of the seniority list of Assistant Engineers in another department---Respondents using political leverage through Principal Advisor to Chief Minister manoeuvred their posting as Executive Engineers in Local Government and Rural Development Department---Petitioners who were serving in Local Government and Rural Development Department and were due for promotion voiced their grievance through Constitutional petition in the nature of quo warranto---Effect---Appointments of respondents were made in flagrant violation of Punjab Local Government and Rural Development Department Service Rules, 1981 and Punjab Civil Servants (Appointments and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974---Such appointments were made despite the fact that officers of the rank of Executive Engineers were not only available in the department itself but were awaiting for posting in the department--­Jurisdiction of High Court was not barred to issue orders/directions in the `nature of quo warranto to persons who were holding public offices without any lawful authority---Provisions of Art. 212 of the Constitution and S. 4, Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, would not bar jurisdiction of High Court in such matter---Petitioners would although benefit in case order in the writ of quo warranto was issued, but such fact would not deter them to maintain writ of quo warranto to challenge appointment of respondents being violative of law and rules---Before requisition was made by Principal Advisor to Chief Minister at the behest and for the benefit of respondents, official of the Local Government informed the Government that…
🔒
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