2024 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
MASOODA IQBAL, ELEMENTARY TEACHER, GOVERNMENT GIRLS MIDDLE SCHOOL AAHI, DISTRICT BHIMBER and another Versus SECRETARY ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION and 7 others
| Citation | 2024 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court (AJ&K) |
| Bench Members | Kh. Muhammad Nasim and Raza Ali Khan, JJ |
| Parties | MASOODA IQBAL, ELEMENTARY TEACHER, GOVERNMENT GIRLS MIDDLE SCHOOL AAHI, DISTRICT BHIMBER and another Versus SECRETARY ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION and 7 others |
| Primary Law | Civil service |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2024 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil service as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2024 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court (AJ&K) bench comprising: Kh. Muhammad Nasim and Raza Ali Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2024 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (MASOODA IQBAL, ELEMENTARY TEACHER, GOVERNMENT GIRLS MIDDLE SCHOOL AAHI, DISTRICT BHIMBER and another Versus SECRETARY ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION and 7 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- ----Order of Services Tribunal to deposit security fee, non-compliance of---Effect---Dismissal of appeal---Appellants assailed order passed by the Services Tribunal whereby their appeal was dismissed for non-deposit of security fee---Validity---Appellants were directed to deposit security fee within a period of one week from first date of hearing---Till the next date, the appellants failed to deposit the security fee, where upon the Member Service Tribunal passed the order of depositing the fee on the same date and adjourned the case for the very next day---However, on next date of hearing i.e. on next day no body appeared on behalf of the appellants, whereupon the Service Tribunal dismissed the appeal for non-compliance of its orders---Fee depositing order was passed on initial date in presence of the Advocate, representing the appellants, whereby the appeal of the appellants was admitted for regular hearing and the appellants were directed to deposit the security fees at the concerned circuit while on the next date, the clerk of the counsel for the appellants was present before the Court, who was directed to deposit the security fee on the same day, but he failed to do so and on next date i.e. very next day, nobody appeared on behalf of the appellants---Thus, the Service Tribunal had no option except to dismiss the appeal due to non-compliance of its previous orders---Appellants had failed to furnish any plausible reason for not depositing the security fee, despite clear orders of the Service Tribunal---Appeal, having no force, was dismissed.
- Sardar Hamid Raza Khan, Advocate for Appellant.
- Ch. Shakeel Zaman, Additional Advocate General for Respondents.
- 3. The learned Advocates, representing the parties reiterated the grounds already incorporated in the concise statements, therefore, the same are not repeated here, for the purpose of brevity.
- 5. In our considered view, the learned Service Tribunal has committed no illegality while passing the impugned order, as the order dated 18.03.2022, was passed in presence of the learned Advocate, representing the appellants, whereby the appeal of the appellants was admitted for regular hearing and the appellants were directed to deposit the security feel at Circuit Mirpur, on 06.04.2022. On the said date, the Clerk of the counsel for the appellants was present before the Court, who was directed to deposit the security fee on the same day, but he failed to do so. On the next date i.e. 07.04.2022, nobody appeared on behalf of the appellants. In this state of affairs, the learned Service Tribunal had no option except to dismiss the appeal in non-compliance of the Court orders dated 18.03.2022 and 06.04.2022. The appellants have failed to furnish any plausible reason for not depositing the security fee, despite clear orders of the learned Service Tribunal.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order of the Service Tribunal dated 7-4-2022 in Service Appeal No.92 of 2022).
Judgment & Decree
KH. MUHAMMAD NASIM, J.
The captioned appeal by leave of the Court, has arisen out of the order of the Service Tribunal dated 07.04.2022, passed in Service Appeal No.92 of 2022. 2 The brief facts, forming background of the captioned appeal are that the appellants, herein, filed an appeal before the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Service Tribunal, on 18.03.2022, against the transfer order dated 15.03.2022. The learned Chairman of the Service Tribunal, admitted the appeal for regular hearing and suspended the operation of the transfer order dated 15.03.2022, till next date of hearing, vide order dated 18.03.2022. Through the same order, the appellants, herein, were directed to deposit security fee, within a period of one week and the file was transferred to Circuit Mirpur while fixing the next date as 06.04.2022. On the aforesaid date, the Assistant Registrar Circuit Mirpur, reported that the security fee has not been deposited, whereupon the learned Member of the Service Tribunal directed the Clerk of the counsel for the appellants, herein, to deposit the security fee today and the case was fixed for 07.04.2022. On the said date, nobody appeared on behalf of the appellants, whereupon, the learned Member of the Service Tribunal dismissed the appeal for non-compliance of the Court orders dated 18.03.2022 and 06.04.2022. The appellants, have challenged the aforesaid order of the learned Service Tribunal by way of present appeal by leave of the Court.
3. The learned Advocates, representing the parties reiterated the grounds already incorporated in the concise statements, therefore, the same are not repeated here, for the purpose of brevity.
4. The perusal of the record reveals that the appellants, herein, filed an appeal before the Service Tribunal against the transfer order dated 15.03.2022. The appeal was admitted for regular hearing and the appellants herein, were directed to deposit security fee within a period of one week, vide order dated 18.03.2022. Through the same order, the file was transferred to Circuit Mirpur while fixing the next date in the case as 06.04.2022. On the said date, the appellants, failed to deposit the security fee, whereupon the learned Member of the Service Tribunal passed the following order:- On the aforesaid date i.e. 07.04.2022, nobody appeared on behalf of the appellants, whereupon the learned Service Tribunal dismissed the appeal for non-compliance of the Court orders.
5. In our considered view, the learned Service Tribunal has committed no illegality while passing the impugned order, as the order dated 18.03.2022, was passed in presence of the learned Advocate, representing the appellants, whereby the appeal of the appellants was admitted for regular hearing and the appellants were directed to deposit the security feel at Circuit Mirpur, on 06.04.2022. On the said date, the Clerk of the counsel for the appellants was present before the Court, who was directed to deposit the security fee on the same day, but he failed to do so. On the next date i.e. 07.04.2022, nobody appeared on behalf of the appellants. In this state of affairs, the learned Service Tribunal had no option except to dismiss the appeal in non-compliance of the Court orders dated 18.03.2022 and 06.04.2022. The appellants have failed to furnish any plausible reason for not depositing the security fee, despite clear orders of the learned Service Tribunal. The upshot of the above discussion is that this appeal finding no force, is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. MQ/6/SC(AJ&K) Appeal dismissed.