2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Ms. GULSHAN TAHIRA Versus ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES and 2 others
| Citation | 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Aslam, J |
| Parties | Ms. GULSHAN TAHIRA Versus ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES and 2 others |
| Primary Law | Punjab Civil Servants Act (VIII of 1974) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Civil Servants Act (VIII of 1974) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Aslam, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (Ms. GULSHAN TAHIRA Versus ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES and 2 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Irfan Ahmad Sheikh for Petitioner.
- Faisal Mahmood Ghani for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 8
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Constitutional petition
Petitioner had prayed that promotion procedure devised by Authority with short statutory numerical strength could be declared as void ab initio and violative of the Fundamental Rights and that promotion made under the promotion procedure could be declared as arbitrary, discriminatory, whimsical and capricious practically designed with ulterior motives achieved by abuse of power and misuse of authority
Authorities submitted that petitioner had been dismissed from service and on her dismissal from service could not pursue constitutional petition until she was reinstated
Petition having become infructuous, same was disposed of as such, in circumstances. 2006 SCMR 1867 ref.
Judgment & Decree
SARDAR MUHAMMAD ASLAM, J.
The petitioner, through this constitutional petition, has sought the following relief in his prayer:-- "It is humbly prayed that Promotion Procedure, dated 24-4-2006 devised by respondent No.2 with short statutory numerical strength may graciously be declared as void ab initio and violative to the Fundamental Rights and a breach of the provisions of the SECP Act itself. Further prayed that the promotion made under the Promotion Procedure may kindly be declared as arbitrary, discriminatory, whimsical and capricious practically designed with ulterior motives achieved by abuse of power and misuse of authority. Further prayed that the excessive burden on the SECP Fund may kindly be declared as violative of the case-law pronounced by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in its judgment cited as 2006 SCMR 1867."
2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has been dismissed from service on 11-10-2007. She has filed departmental appeal. She is no more an aggrieved person and this petition has become infructuous.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner concedes that petitioner has been dismissed from service but her appeal for her reinstatement is under process and this petition, thus, can proceed.
4. After examining the above stance, I am of the view that the petitioner on her dismissal from service cannot pursue this petition until she is reinstated. This petition has become infructuous and is disposed of as such.
5. The petitioner may, on her reinstatement, if so advised, file a fresh constitutional petition on the same cause of action. H.B.T./G-3/L Order accordingly.