| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2004 SLG 980 2004 SLD 980 2004 SCMR 630 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petitions Nos. 1452, 1453 and 1454 of 2002, decision dated: 2-04-2003.(On appeal from the judgment dated 6-6-2002 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Karachi, passed in Service Appeals Nos.103-K to 105-K of 1999)
NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI, ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR AND SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, JJ
Muhammad Munir Paracha, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners. Hafiz S.A. Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court with Mehr Khan Malik, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents (in C.P. No. 1453 of 2002).
Respondents in person (in Civil Petitions Nos. 1452 and 1454 of
Civil Petitions Nos. 1452, 1453 and 1454 of 2002, decision dated: 2-04-2003.(On appeal from the judgment dated 6-6-2002 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Karachi, passed in Service Appeals Nos.103-K to 105-K of 1999)
NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI, ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR AND SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, JJ
Muhammad Munir Paracha, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners. Hafiz S.A. Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court with Mehr Khan Malik, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents (in C.P. No. 1453 of 2002).
Respondents in person (in Civil Petitions Nos. 1452 and 1454 of
WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY through Chairman, WAPDA House, Lahore
VS
ABBAS ALI MALANO and another
Law:
Section:
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)----Art. 212(3)---Supreme Court Rules, 1980, O.XIII, R.1---Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), S.4---Limitation---Condonation---Three petitions for leave to appeal against common passed by Service Tribunal in three appeals ---Limitation---Condonation of delay---Tribunal sent one copy of impugned to one petitioner, who after its receipt filed petition within time---Remaining two petitions were filed after receipt of certified copies of impugned ---Explanation seemed to be reasonable---Supreme Court condoned delay in filing petitions. (b) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)----- ----S. 4---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212(3)---Termination of services of ad hoc appointees on ground of being violative of law--¬Petitioners were appointed on ad hoc basis for period of six months on recommendations of Placement Bureau subject to qualifying examination---Petitioners could not qualify examination, thus, their services were terminated; but such order was not implemented and they were sent for specialized training course for evaluating their performance---Services of appointees were terminated with change of Government treating them as political appointees---Constitutional petitions filed by appointees against termination order were allowed by High Court---Authority did not press their petitions before Supreme Court after grant of leave to appeal leaving of High Court in field alone---Appointees resultantly were reinstated in service on terms and conditions mentioned in their initial order of appointment subject to qualifying examination, which was never held--Appointees in order to get their services regularized approached High Court, which advised authority to organize examination---Authority again, with change of Government, terminated services of appointees terming them to have been appointed in violation of the rules laid down in human rights case--¬Service Tribunal set aside such order---Validity---Case of appointees did not fall within any of the categories laid down in human rights case--¬None of such appointees was lacking requisite qualification or had been appointed by incompetent authority---Authority had never…
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