2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and another Versus Ch. MUHAMMAD ASHRAF and another,
| Citation | 2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Irshad Hasan Khan and Sh. Ijaz Nisar, JJ |
| Parties | PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and another Versus Ch. MUHAMMAD ASHRAF and another, |
| Primary Law | (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), (a) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), (a) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Irshad Hasan Khan and Sh. Ijaz Nisar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and another Versus Ch. MUHAMMAD ASHRAF and another,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Dr. Mohy-ud-Din Qazi, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners.
- Date of hearing: 23rd September, 1999.
- Dr. Mohy‑ud‑Din Qazi, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 4
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212
Suspension from service
Jurisdiction of Service Tribunal in respect of matters relating to terms and conditions of service
Matters relating to terms and conditions of civil servants, would include suspension from service of a civil servant and Service Tribunal alone had the jurisdiction to adjudicate upon such matter in appropriate proceedings
Jurisdiction of High Court in the matter was barred under Art. 212 of Constitution of Pakistan (1973).
Arts. 185(3) & 199
Suspension from service
Continuous suspension from service of civil servant was ex facie unjustified and High Court passed order against such continuous suspension
Present order passed by Supreme Court was confined to facts of the case in question alone
Case was not fit for interference by Supreme Court.
Judgment & Decree
We are inclined to agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner that the matters relating to terms and conditions of service of the civil I servants also include suspension, from service of a civil servant and that the Service Tribunal alone has the jurisdiction to adjudicate upon such matters in appropriate proceedings. The jurisdiction of the High Court is clearly barred in such matters under Article 212 of the Constitution. Be that as it may, in the instant case, we find that continuous suspension from service of the respondents was ex facie unjustified. This is, therefore, not a fit case for interference with the impugned order of the High Court. This order is, however, confined to the facts of this case alone. Resultantly the petition is dismissed, and leave declined. H.B.T./P‑53/S Petition dismissed.