2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
PARVEZ AHMAD Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others
| Citation | 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Roshan Essani and Khilji Arif Hussain, JJ |
| Parties | PARVEZ AHMAD Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others |
| Primary Law | Airports Security Force Act (LXXVII of 1975) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Airports Security Force Act (LXXVII of 1975) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Roshan Essani and Khilji Arif Hussain, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (PARVEZ AHMAD Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ghulam Sarwar Chandio for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing; 24th December 2002
Headnotes / Summary
S.7-F [as amended by Airport Security Force (Amendment) Ordinance (XXXV of 1984)
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Petitioner who was employed as A.S.-I. in Airport Security Force was tried on the charge of misappropriation/embezzlment of public money by Field General Court Martial
Petitioner was convicted, sentenced to suffer R.I. for four years and to pay the embezzled amount and was also dismissed from service-- Petitioner was subject to Pakistan Army Act, 1952 and was convicted and sentenced by Competent Authority under the said Act
Provisions of S.7 of Airport Security Force Act, 1975 had provided appeal/revision against order passed by said Competent. Authority
Constitutional petition filed by petitioner against order of Competent Authority passed against him without exhausting remedy before proper forum provided under law, was not maintainable
Constitutional jurisdiction could only be invoked when no adequate and efficacious remedy was provided under law. Azhar Majeed Khalid v. Force Commander, Airport Security Force, Quaid-e-Azam International Airport HQ, Karachi and others 2002 SCMR 1135 ref.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD ROSHAN ESSANI, J.
By this Constitution petition, the petitioner has sought following reliefs:-- (a) declare that the petitioner being Civil Servant is liable to be proceeded with under Efficiency and Discipline Rules 1973. (b) declare that the impugned order of dismissal from service, civil imprisonment, reduction to the rank of Guard and recovery of amount etc. is illegal, invalid and without lawful authority. (c) declare that the petitioner continues to be in service of the respondent. (d) pass order of release of the petitioner from the Central Prison, Karachi. (e) direct the respondents to produce the documents. (f) costs of the petition may be awarded. (g) any other relief/reliefs which this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case may also be awarded. Brief facts of the case, as disclosed in the petition, are that the petitioner was employed as A.S.-I. in Airport Security Force (ASF). The petitioner way tried on the charge of misappropriating/embezzling public money by Field General Court Martial and was convicted and sentenced to suffer RI for four years and to pay the embezzled amount i.e. Rs.2,68,
805. He was also dismissed front service by impugned judgment dated 1-10-2002. We have heard Mr. Ghulam Sarwar Chandio, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Admittedly the petitioner was serving as A.S.I. in Airport Security Force. He was subject to Pakistan Army Act 1952 (XXXIX of 1952). The petitioner was convicted and sentenced by a General Court Martial convened by competent Authority under the Act. The section 7-F of Airport Security Force (Amendment) Ordinance, 1984 provides that in all cases decided, the aggrieved person can file appeal/revision within a period of 30 days of the order/punishment before the authority specified in the section. It is well-settled that writ jurisdiction could only be invoked when no adequate and efficacious remedy is provided under law. In the case in hand the right of appeal and revision has been provided to the aggrieved person and he can exhaust remedy before the proper forum provided under law. In this content reference can be made to the case of Azhar Majeed Khalid v. Force Commander Airport Security Force Quaid-e-Azam International Airport HQ Karachi and others reported in (2002 SCMR 1135). Resultantly, the petition is misconceived and stands dismissed in limine. H.B.T./P-70/K Petition dismissed.