1988 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
MUHANIMAD PARVEZ and others Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB
| Citation | 1988 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Fazl-i-Mahmood, J |
| Parties | MUHANIMAD PARVEZ and others Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Fazl-i-Mahmood, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (MUHANIMAD PARVEZ and others Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rao Hamid Mukhtar Khan for Petitioners.
- S.M. Zubair, Add1.A.-G. for Respondent.
- ---Art. 199--Civil services--Ad hoc appointment--Writ in the nature of mandamus, held, cannot be issued in matter of ad hoc appointment- Writ petition disposed of in view of Additional Advocate-General's assurance that petitioners' case would be considered sympathetically after giving weightage on basis of performance of their ad hoc appointment.
- The learned Additional Advocate-General informs that the petitioners were interviewed by the Director Technical Education on 12-4-1988 for the purpose of selection for ad hoc appointment. He further submits that the merit list of the petitioners and other candidates has been prepared. The petitioners if they qualify would be given ad hoc appointment for one year subject to their regularisation in due course by the Punjab Public Service Commission.
- 2. I am unable to appreciate the anxiety of the learned counsel for the petitioners. The learned counsel for the petitioners was unable to show residing of an absolute right in the petitioners to lay foundation for this Court to issue an imperative direction to the respondent to appoint the petitioners on ad hoc basis irrespective of the fact whether they qualify in the interview or not. The learned Additional Advocate General has further pointed out that the Government is taking remedial measures in respect of .ad hoc appointees to bring about uniformity and equality of treatment between appointees of various subjects.
- 3. The petitioners must exhibit patience and wait for the result of the interview in which they have appeared. This Court is hot in a position to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus in the ratter of ad hoc appointment. The learned Additional Advocate-General assures that the petitioners' case will be considered sympathetically after giving them weightage on the basis of performance of their ad hoc appointment. In view of the abovenoted statement on behalf of the Law officer of the Province this writ petition stands disposed of.
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 199--Civil services--Ad hoc appointment--Writ in the nature of mandamus, held, cannot be issued in matter of ad hoc appointment- Writ petition disposed of in view of Additional Advocate-General's assurance that petitioners' case would be considered sympathetically after giving weightage on basis of performance of their ad hoc appointment.
Judgment & Decree
Art. 199--Civil services--Ad hoc appointment--Writ in the nature of mandamus, held, cannot be issued in matter of ad hoc appointment- Writ petition disposed of in view of Additional Advocate-General's assurance that petitioners' case would be considered sympathetically after giving weightage on basis of performance of their ad hoc appointment. Rao Hamid Mukhtar Khan for Petitioners. S.M. Zubair, Add1.A.-G. for Respondent. The learned Additional Advocate-General informs that the petitioners were interviewed by the Director Technical Education on 12-4-1988 for the purpose of selection for ad hoc appointment. He further submits that the merit list of the petitioners and other candidates has been prepared. The petitioners if they qualify would be given ad hoc appointment for one year subject to their regularisation in due course by the Punjab Public Service Commission.
2. I am unable to appreciate the anxiety of the learned counsel for the petitioners. The learned counsel for the petitioners was unable to show residing of an absolute right in the petitioners to lay foundation for this Court to issue an imperative direction to the respondent to appoint the petitioners on ad hoc basis irrespective of the fact whether they qualify in the interview or not. The learned Additional Advocate General has further pointed out that the Government is taking remedial measures in respect of .ad hoc appointees to bring about uniformity and equality of treatment between appointees of various subjects.
3. The petitioners must exhibit patience and wait for the result of the interview in which they have appeared. This Court is hot in a position to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus in the ratter of ad hoc appointment. The learned Additional Advocate-General assures that the petitioners' case will be considered sympathetically after giving them weightage on the basis of performance of their ad hoc appointment. In view of the abovenoted statement on behalf of the Law officer of the Province this writ petition stands disposed of. A. A./M-835/ L Petition disposed of.