2007S2006 (PLP)
SECRETARY, HEALTH DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB, LAHORE and others Versus Dr. FAZAL-UR-REHMAN
| Citation | 2007S2006 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Javed Iqbal and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ |
| Parties | SECRETARY, HEALTH DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB, LAHORE and others Versus Dr. FAZAL-UR-REHMAN |
| Primary Law | Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007S2006 (PLP)?
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 2007S2006 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Javed Iqbal and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007S2006 (PLP) (SECRETARY, HEALTH DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB, LAHORE and others Versus Dr. FAZAL-UR-REHMAN). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Aziz Ahmad Chughtai, Advocate Supreme Court and Rao Muhammad Yousaf Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Hafiz Tariq Nasim, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 9-10-2002 passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, in Appeal No.1325 of 2002).
S.4
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212(3)
Order passed by Service Tribunal, non-compliance of
Authorities failed to decide representation of civil servant within two months as directed by Service Tribunal
Period during which the representation of civil servant remained pending was declared by the authorities to be extraordinary leave without pay
Service Tribunal allowed appeal and declared that the civil servant was entitled to full pay for the period
Civil servant could not be made to suffer for inaction and inordinate delay on the part of authorities to take a decision on the matter of transfer in time
Authorities ought to have suspended the operation of their earlier order accordingly
No legal infirmity was found in the judgment passed by Service Tribunal
No question of law of public importance was involved in the petition so as to warrant interference under Art.212(3) of the Constitution
Leave to appeal was refused.
Judgment & Decree
FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.
This petition is directed against judgment, dated 9-10-2002 passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in Appeal No.1325 of 2002.
2. The respondent, while serving as Medical Officer, Basic Health Unit, Khanpur, District Sheikhupura, was transferred on 28-8-1997 for posting in Bahawalpur Division. He filed Service Appeal No.3507 of 1997 before the Tribunal which was disposed of, on 1-11-1997. The case was remanded to the petitioner No.1 for passing final orders within a period of two months and the respondent was allowed to remain at Khanpur till then. The petitioner No.1, issued an order, dated 12-1-2002 whereby the respondent was transferred to the Government Nawaz Sharif Hospital, Yakki Gate, Lahore. The intervening period from 1-1-1998 till the joining of his new assignment was treated to be extraordinary leave without pay. The Appeal No.1325 of 2002 of the respondent was allowed by the Tribunal, by the impugned judgment dated 9-10-2002, whereby the respondent was held entitled to the payment of full salary from 8-9-1997 onward.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the earlier order, dated 1-11-1997 passed by the Tribunal was not communicated to the petitioners immediately. It was next contended that the intervening period from 1-1-1997 to 14-1-2002 was rightly treated by the departmental authorities as extraordinary leave without pay as the petitioner had not performed any duties.
4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent argued that the earlier order, dated 1-11-1997 was passed by the Tribunal in the presence of the District Attorney. The petitioner No.1 decided the matter of transfer of the respondent on 12-1-2002 with an unconscionable delay of more than three years. Therefore, the respondent could not be made to stiffer on account of the failure of the petitioner No.1 to comply with the order dated 1-11-1997 of the Tribunal and to decide the matter within a period of two months.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. We find that the Tribunal in its judgment, dated 1-11-1997 directed the petitioner No.1 to decide the matter within a period of two months and allowed the respondent to continue at Khanpur till then. The petitioner No.1 failed to carry out the aforesaid judgment of the Tribunal by issuing necessary orders and to decide the case within the timeframe as directed by the Tribunal. The petitioner No.1 took more than three years to pass the final order dated 12-1-2002. The respondent could not be made to suffer for inaction and inordinate delay on the part of the petitioner No.1 to take a decision on the matter of transfer in time. By virtue of the judgment dated 1-11-1997 of the Tribunal, the respondent was entitled to remain posted at Khanpur till the decision of his transfer case. The petitioner No.1 ought to have suspended the operation of his earlier order, dated 28-8-1997 accordingly. We do not find any legal infirmity in the impugned judgment passed by the Tribunal. This petition does not involve any substantial question of law of public importance so as to warrant interference under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. This is not a fit case for grant of leave to appeal.
6. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in this petition and the same is dismissed accordingly. M.H./S-279/SC Petition dismissed.