Case Details

Citation(s)
2002 SLG 1110 2002 SLD 1110 2002 SCMR 142
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No. 685 of 1 998, decision dated: 25-01-1999.(On appeal from the judgment dated 26-8-1998 of the High Court of Sindh, Hyderabad Circuit in C.P. No. 45/97)
AJMAL MIAN, C.J. AND MAMOON KAZI, J
A.G. Mangi, Advocate Supreme Court with Akhlaq A. Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.

TEEKAM DAS M. HASEEJA, EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, WAPDA

VS

CHAIRMAN, WAPDA and another

Law:

Section:

Civil Servant Act (LXXI of 1973)---S. 8---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts.199 & 212(3)---Seniority in service---Determination---Failure to decide representation of civil servant by the Department---High Court in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction declined to decide the matter as the same was within the jurisdiction of Service Tribunal---Validity---Civil servant had every right to approach the Service Tribunal if his representation was not decided within the statutory time allowed under the Service Tribunals Act, 1973---Where appeal before Service Tribunal was barred by limitation, Supreme Court directed the Tribunal to take into consideration all the relevant facts for deciding application for condonation of delay sympathetically---Leave to appeal was refused. JUDGMENT AJMAL MIAN, C.J.---This is a petition for leave to appeal against the order dated 26-8-1998 passed by a learned Division Bench of the High Court of Sindh in Constitutional Petition No. 45 of 1997 filed by the petitioner seeking direction against the respondents to decide his representation for determination of the seniority, dismissing the same in limine. The petitioner has, therefore, filed the present petition for leave to appeal. 2. In support of the above petition Mr. A.G. Mangi, learned counsel for the petitioner, has vehemently contended that the learned Division Bench of the High Court was not justified in declining the petitioner's above Constitutional petition as in spite of the best efforts of the petitioner during the last several years, the respondents had not decided the petitioner's representation for fixation of the seniority, which would have entitled him to promotion as a matter of right. 3. The above contention seems to be devoid of any force. The High Court declined to invoke in aid its Constitutional jurisdiction for the following reasons:-- "We feel that the petition being service matter, it is only the Federal Service…
🔒
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