2005 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
FARID ULLAH KHAN Versus FEDERAL TAX OMBUDSMAN and others
| Citation | 2005 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Aslam, J |
| Parties | FARID ULLAH KHAN Versus FEDERAL TAX OMBUDSMAN and others |
| Primary Law | Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 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: 2005 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (FARID ULLAH KHAN Versus FEDERAL TAX OMBUDSMAN and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rao Javaid-ul-Haque Khan for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 25th January, 2005.
- ----Ss. 9, 14 & 32---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts.199 & 21.2---Constitutional petition---Transfer of Civil servant from one place of working to another by the order of Federal Tax Ombudsman---Petitioner serving as Income Tax Inspector at place P.S. was transferred to another Zone by direction of Federal Tax Ombudsman---Transfer was directed on ground that real brother of petitioner was a practicing Advocate in the District where petitioner was serving---Petitioner had challenged direction of Federal Tax Ombudsman in Constitutional petition before High Court alleging that Federal Tax Ombudsman had no jurisdiction to pass impugned order---Validity---Federal Tax Ombudsman exercised quasi-judicial jurisdiction; maladministration in Central Board of Revenue or any of its establishments could be taken notice of by Federal Tax Ombudsman---Petitioner being a civil servant, direction to transfer him outside his home District was squarely covered by terms and conditions of his service--Article 212 of Constitution had imposed complete bar to entertain Constitutional petition against transfer of civil servant; besides, petitioner had already availed an adequate remedy by filing representation before President of Pakistan under S. 32 of Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman, Ordinance, 2000---Even on that ground Constitutional petition was not entertainable.
- 3. The observation of the Federal Tax Ombudsman is to transfer the petitioner from his present place of posting to another Zone, as his real brother is a practising Advocate in the said District. This observation has been impugned in the Constitutional jurisdiction that Federal Tax Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to pass this order.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 9, 14 & 32
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts.199 & 21.2
Constitutional petition
Transfer of Civil servant from one place of working to another by the order of Federal Tax Ombudsman
Petitioner serving as Income Tax Inspector at place P.S. was transferred to another Zone by direction of Federal Tax Ombudsman
Transfer was directed on ground that real brother of petitioner was a practicing Advocate in the District where petitioner was serving
Petitioner had challenged direction of Federal Tax Ombudsman in Constitutional petition before High Court alleging that Federal Tax Ombudsman had no jurisdiction to pass impugned order
Federal Tax Ombudsman exercised quasi-judicial jurisdiction; maladministration in Central Board of Revenue or any of its establishments could be taken notice of by Federal Tax Ombudsman
Petitioner being a civil servant, direction to transfer him outside his home District was squarely covered by terms and conditions of his service--Article 212 of Constitution had imposed complete bar to entertain Constitutional petition against transfer of civil servant; besides, petitioner had already availed an adequate remedy by filing representation before President of Pakistan under S. 32 of Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman, Ordinance, 2000
Even on that ground Constitutional petition was not entertainable.
Judgment & Decree
The petitioner through this Constitutional petition, calls in question the order dated 13-12-2004, whereby the petitioner has been directed to be transferred out from Pakpattan Sharif to another Zone.
2. Briefly the facts relevant for the disposal of this petition are that the petitioner was serving as Income Tax Inspector at Pakpattan Sharif. A dispute arose between the petitioner, his colleagues and respondent No.5 who filed various applications/complaints against the petitioner to different functionaries as also to the Federal Tax Ombudsman, which were consigned to record. The Federal Tax Ombudsman observed that the petitioner be posted out in the same manner as Rao Abdul Qayyum, Income Tax Inspector. The petitioner filed representation under section 32 of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance, 2000 before the President of Pakistan, through proper channel against the findings of Federal Tax Ombudsman in Complaint No.419 of 2004, which was duly forwarded by the Regional Commissioner to Central Board of Revenue, Islamabad for onward transmission to the Honourable President of Pakistan which is still pending before him.
3. The observation of the Federal Tax Ombudsman is to transfer the petitioner from his present place of posting to another Zone, as his real brother is a practising Advocate in the said District. This observation has been impugned in the Constitutional jurisdiction that Federal Tax Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to pass this order.
4. Federal Tax Ombudsman exercises quasi-judicial jurisdiction. Maladministration in the Central Board of Revenue or any of its establishment can be taken notice of by Federal Tax Ombudsman. The petitioner is a civil servant. Direction to transfer him outside the home District it squarely covered by terms and conditions of his service Article 212 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 imposes complete bar to entertain Constitutional petitions. Besides, the petitioner has already availed an adequate remedy by filing a representation before the President of Pakistan under section 32 of the Establishment of Officer of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance, 2000 in this view of the matter, even on this ground, the Constitutional petition not entertainable.
5. For what has been discussed above, this Constitutional petition is dismissed in limine along with all other accompanied civil miscellaneous petitions. However, it is observed that the petitioner may seek his remedy from the Federal Service Tribunal, if so advised. H.B.T./F-87/L Petition dismissed. ***