| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2003 SLG 2817 2003 SLD 2817 2003 PLC 56 |
Sindh High Court
High Court Appeal No. 70 of 2001, decision dated: 19-03-2002.
SABIHUDDIN AHMED AND S. ALI ASLAM, JAFRI, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
High Court Appeal No. 70 of 2001, decision dated: 19-03-2002.
SABIHUDDIN AHMED AND S. ALI ASLAM, JAFRI, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
HABIBUR REHMAN
VS
DEFENCE SECRETARY OF GOVERNMENT OF SINDH COMMUNICATION and others
Law:
Section:
(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-------Ss. 42, 54 & 56---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.9 & O. VII, R.11---Sindh Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973), S.4---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212---Suit for declaration and injunction ---Promotion--Plaintiff (civil servant) being aggrieved with decision of Selection Board for not recommending him for promotion filed suit for declaring such decision to be null and void; that his fitness for promotion be re-determined in accordance with promotion policy; and as interim relief, respondents be restrained from issuing notification of promotion on the basis of recommendations of Selection Board---Trial Court dismissed suit under O.VII, R.11, C.P.C. as being barred by Art.212 of the Constitution--Contention of plaintiff was that Art.212 of the Constitution did not bar jurisdiction of Civil Court in all matters relating to terms and conditions of civil servant, but only to such matters to which jurisdiction of Service Tribunal established under Art.212(1) of the Constitution was extended--Validity---Findings of Trial Court were correct to the extent that question of following a particular promotion policy might be a matter germane to terms and conditions of service---Such fact itself would not be sufficient to attract application of Art.212 of the Constitution and there was great deal of force in contention of plaintiff---Service Tribunal was debarred by virtue of proviso (b) to SA(1) of Sindh Service Tribunals Act, 1973 from entertaining appeals against determination of fitness to be promoted---Findings of Trial Court that plaintiff had remedy before Service Tribunal and suit was barred by Art. 212 of the Constitution was, thus, not sustainable Plaintiff could not Claim a vested right to be promoted, thus, he might not be entitled to a declaration as regards his legal character or right to property under S.42 of specific Relief Act, 1877---Plaintiff under S.54 of Specific Relief Act, 1877 could always apply for a perpetual injunction to prevent breach of an obligation existing in his favour---If plaintiff was not entitled to any declaratory relief, an injunction could always be granted to prevent…
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