Case Details

Citation(s)
2007 SLG 1998 2007 SLD 1998 2007 PLC 647
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petitions Nos.D-206 to 210, 402 and 403 of 2007, decision dated: 29-03-2007.
SABIHUDDIN AHMED, C.J. AND GULZAR AHMED, J

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

FAISAL AKRAM

VS

SECRETARY PRODUCTION and another FAISAL AKRAM vs SECRETARY PRODUCTION and another

Law:

Section:

(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-------Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Petitioners who were employees of Pakistan Steel Mills Corporation, were aggrieved by the refusal of Corporation to accept their resignation and obtain an employment elsewhere on better terms despite having agreed to disburse the amount of Rs.50,000 contemplated in terms of surety bond executed by them at the time of obtaining employment---Resignations of petitioners were declined by the Corporation allegedly in the public interest as the Corporation was a semi-autonomous body working for the public interest under the control of Federal Ministry of Industries, Production and Special Initiatives---Position taken up by the respondents seemed to be self-contradictory---Services under the Corporation had not been declared to be essential for the life and well-being of the society and no restriction under the Essential Services Act, 1958 had been imposed--Petitioners could not be deemed to be civil servants for the purpose of S.2-A of Service Tribunals Act, 1974 in terms of pronouncement of Supreme Court in case PLD 2006 SC 602---Corporation authorities under no circumstances could place any fetters upon the petitioner's decision to terminate their contract of service but could only claim damage for the breach of contract, if any---Constitutional petition was allowed in circumstances. Muhammad Mubinus Salam v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 2006 SC 602 ref. (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- ----Arts. 11 & l99---Constitutional petition---Master and servant---Concept---Refusal to accept resignation of employee by the employer---Fundamental rights, infringement of---Concept of master and servant contract pre-supposed voluntariness on the part of the parties and could not, under any ,circumstance be treated as a master and slave relationship---Article 11 of the Constitution had forbidden forced labour; and compulsory service could be required only by law for a public .purpose---Employer had contended that employment in the Corporation (Employer) was not regulated by any law, the imposition of fetters would be violative of fundamental rights guaranteed by Art.11 of the Constitution, for…
🔒
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