2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
MUHAMMAD ISHTIAQ and others Versus PUNJAB SERVICE TRIBUNAL, LAHORE and others
| Citation | 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Tanvir Ahmed Khan, Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ISHTIAQ and others Versus PUNJAB SERVICE TRIBUNAL, LAHORE and others |
| Primary Law | Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Tanvir Ahmed Khan, Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (MUHAMMAD ISHTIAQ and others Versus PUNJAB SERVICE TRIBUNAL, LAHORE and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rafique Ahmad Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- M. Saleem Shad, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order, dated 25-2-2002 passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore in Appeals Nos.1487, 1488, 1489, 1490, 1491, 1492, 1493, 1494, 1495, 1496, 1497 and 1498 of 2001).
S. 4
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212(3)
Appointment against leave vacancies
Adjustment against regular vacancies
Petitioners were appointed against leave vacancies and order of their termination passed by the authorities was maintained by Service Tribunal
Service Tribunal had rightly found that the services of petitioners were liable to be terminated as soon as the officials who proceeded on leave reported back to duty but the petitioners were adjusted against regular vacancies
Service Tribunal had further rightly found that the posts were never advertised and neither sufficient number of applications were received nor interviews of the petitioners were taken by Recruitment Committee furthermore no merit list was prepared
Service Tribunal was also right in holding that the petitioners were adjusted against regular vacancies without observing procedure for recruitment and without merit and such adjustment orders being ab initio void could not be sustained
Supreme Court declined to take any exception to the judgment passed by Service Tribunal
Petitioners failed to-disclose any question of law of public importance
Leave to appeal was refused.
Judgment & Decree
KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY, J.
This order shall dispose of C.P.L.As. Nos.1383, 1384, 1385, 1386, 1387, 1388, 1389, 1390, 1391, 1392, 1393 and 1394-L of 2002 which are directed against the same consolidated judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, dated 25-2-2002 through which 12 appeals filed by the petitioners before us, had been dismissed.
2. The petitioners in all these petitions were appointed to different posts in the Directorate of Agriculture (Crop Reporting Service), Punjab, Lahore, against leave vacancies. They continued to retain the said posts in the same capacity till the matter came to the notice of the Secretary, Agriculture and the Provincial Ombudsmen.
3. The continuance of these petitioners in service was thus, examined whereafter their services were terminated. Their departmental appeals were dismissed which led the petitioners to the Punjab Service Tribunal with their respective appeals which were dismissed through the above-mentioned judgment which is now impugned before us.
4. The Service Tribunal refused to come to the rescue of the petitioners for the reasons mentioned in para.6 of its judgment which is reproduced below for ready reference: "(6) The appellants were appointed against leave vacancies. Their services were liable to be terminated as soon as the officials who proceeded on leave reported back to duty but the appellant were adjusted against regular vacancies. The posts were never advertised. Sufficient number of applications were not received, no interviews of the appellants were taken by the Recruitment Committee and no merit list was prepared. The appellants were adjusted against regular vacancies without observing Procedure for recruitment and without merit. The adjustment orders being ab initio void cannot be sustained. I find no ground to interfere."
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners at some length and having considered all aspects of the matter, we find that no exception could be taken to the impugned judgment and further that these petitions did not disclose any question of law of public importance.
6. These petitions are, therefore, dismissed. Leave refused. M.H./M-823/SC Petitions dismissed.