| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1970 SLG 56 1970 SLD 56 = 1970 PLD 139 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 21 of 1968, decision dated: 1st December1969. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the HighCourt of West Pakistan, Peshawar Bench, Peshawar, dated the15th July 1966, in Civil Revision No. 37 of 1966)
HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C.J., MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, SAJJAD AHMOD AND WAHIDUDDIN AHMAD, JJ
Ghulam Mujaddid Mirza, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Khalil-ur-Rahman, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant Muhammad Shafi Sheikh, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Nazar Khan, Senior Attorney No. 1. Raja Said Akbar, Advocate
Civil Appeal No. 21 of 1968, decision dated: 1st December1969. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the HighCourt of West Pakistan, Peshawar Bench, Peshawar, dated the15th July 1966, in Civil Revision No. 37 of 1966)
HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C.J., MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, SAJJAD AHMOD AND WAHIDUDDIN AHMAD, JJ
Ghulam Mujaddid Mirza, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Khalil-ur-Rahman, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant Muhammad Shafi Sheikh, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Nazar Khan, Senior Attorney No. 1. Raja Said Akbar, Advocate
Shahzada MUHAMMAD UMAR BEGvsSULTAN MAHMOOD KHAN AND ANOher
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: O. XXXIX
Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877
Section: 56(d)
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XXXIX, r. 1 and Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 56(d)-Injunction, grant or refusal of-Government servant-Seniority-Suit by Government servant challenging new seniority list and seeking declaration that he could not be reverted to his former post-Prayer for temporary injunction to stay hands of Government from reverting him during pendency of suit-Factors to be borne in mind in granting or refusing such injunction-Court to seriously consider whether it would be right to issue injunction to public department and disturbing thereby its working.The Board of Revenue determined the seniority of the Excise and Taxation Sub-Inspectors under rule 11 of the former N. W. F. P. Excise Subordinate Service Rules. Thereafter one S, an Inspector, Excise and Taxation, was served with a show�cause notice and reverted to his substantive post of Excise and Taxation Sub-Inspector and in his place one U was appointed as Inspector, Excise and Taxation. S thereupon, filed a declaratory suit and meanwhile prayed for a temporary injunc�tion praying to stay the hands of the Government from reverting him during pendency of the suit. The Senior Civil Judge granted the injunction but on appeal the District Judge vacated the same. The High Court in revision, however, reversed the order of the District Judge and restored that of the first Court.Held, the Additional District Judge has in a very compre�hensive and carefully written order, considered all the relevant features of this case, in the light of the well-settled principles for the grant or refusal of temporary injunctions in accordance with law, which are, firstly, whether the plaintiff has a prima facie good case, secondly, whether the balance of convenience lies in favour of the grant of the injunction, and thirdly, whether the plaintiff would suffer an irreparable loss if the injunction is refused. On the point whether the respondent had a prima facie good case, the Additional District Judge has very relevantly referred to the fact that a challenge to the new seniority list which was impugned in the declaratory suit, as well as to the formula on which it is based, has failed in the…