| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2010 SLG 3097 2010 SLD 3097 2010 PLC 532 |
Northern Areas Chief Court
Civil Appeal No. 46-Q of 2009, decided on 8th March, 2010. (On appeal from the judgment, Dated 3-5-2007 passed by the Balochistan Service Tribunal, Quetta in S.A. No. 59 of 2003). Date of hearing: 25th November, 2009.
JAVED IQBAL AND RAJA FAYYAZ AHMED, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Appeal No. 46-Q of 2009, decided on 8th March, 2010. (On appeal from the judgment, Dated 3-5-2007 passed by the Balochistan Service Tribunal, Quetta in S.A. No. 59 of 2003). Date of hearing: 25th November, 2009.
JAVED IQBAL AND RAJA FAYYAZ AHMED, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
ASAD KHAN MENGAL and others
VS
MUHAMMAD AFZAL SHOUQ and others
Law: Balochistan Service Tribunals Act, 1974
Section: 4
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 212(3)
(a) Balochistan Service Tribunals Act (V of 1974)--- ----S. 4---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212(3)---Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to consider the contention of civil servant that merely because respondents claimed that they possessed required qualification or that there were vacancies, Service Tribunal had no justification to order retrospective promotion of respondents with effect from 18-1-1992, which order was in excess of jurisdiction and against the promotion policy/rules and Service Tribunal erred in law to treat officiating promotion as regular promotion. H.M. Saya Co. Karachi v. Wazir Ali Industries Ltd, Karachi and another PLD 1969 SC 65; Government of Pakistan through Secretary Establishment Division v. Bashir Ahmed Khan PLD 1985 SC 309 and Muhammad Iqbal Fraooqi v. Secretary Irrigation and Power Department and others 1987 PLC (C.S.) 25 ref. (b) Balochistan Service Tribunals Act (V of 1974)--- ----S. 4---Necessary party---Non-impleading of---Remedy for party not impleaded---Principles of natural justice---Applicability---Appeals filed by respondents were allowed by Service Tribunal and they were promoted retrospectively---Grievance of appellants was that they were not impleaded in the appeals before Service Tribunal, as they were necessary party to the proceedings---Validity---No fault could be attributed to appellants for non-impleadment, as it was for the respondents to get appellants impleaded being necessary party but they were not arrayed as respondents before Service Tribunal for the reasons known to respondents---Appellants could not be left without remedy especially when they were adversely affected by the of Service Tribunal---Supreme Court set aside passed by Service Tribunal and case was remanded to Service Tribunal for decision afresh---Supreme Court directed Service Tribunal to implead appellants as necessary party and to provide proper opportunity of hearing to all of them---Appeal was allowed. Sm K. Pannalagu Ammal v. The State of Madras and others AIR 1953 Mad. 485; An Infant 1958 1 QB 12; J Rustamji of Lahore v. Official Liquidator of the Peoples and Amritsar Bankβ¦
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