2000SCMR749 (PLP)
UNITED BANK LIMITED and others — Petitioners Versus Mian MANZOOR AHMED and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2000SCMR749 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Irshad Hasan Khan, C.J. and Qazi Muhammad Farooq, J |
| Parties | UNITED BANK LIMITED and others — Petitioners Versus Mian MANZOOR AHMED and others — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2000SCMR749 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2000SCMR749 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Irshad Hasan Khan, C.J. and Qazi Muhammad Farooq, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2000SCMR749 (PLP) (UNITED BANK LIMITED and others — Petitioners Versus Mian MANZOOR AHMED and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Raja Muhammad Akram, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz M. Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 21st February, 2000.
- 3. Raja Muhammad Akram, Senior Advocate Supreme Court appearing on behalf of the petitioners, vehemently argued that the attention of the learned Single Judge was drawn through C.M. No.3 of 1999 to section 2-A of Service Tribunals Act, 1973 and it was pointed out that the Hon'ble High Court had no jurisdiction in the matter because respondent No. l has been declared to be a civil servant and the jurisdiction in the matter vests exclusively in Federal Service Tribunal. However, the Hon'ble Single Judge did not dismiss the Writ Petition and vacate the Stay Order as prayed for and issued notice to respondent No. 1.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from interim orders, dated 25-1-1999 and 28-1-1999 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in W.Ps. Nos.981 of 1999 and 1181 of 1999).
Art.185(3)
Petition for leave to appeal against interim orders of the High Court
Supreme Court normally though would not interfere with the interim orders of the High Court, but in the interest of expeditious disposal of the matter, Court directed the Registrar of the concerned High Court, to fix the relevant Constitutional petition before the Judge of High Court seized of the matter forthwith so that the same was finally disposed of after hearing the -parties within fifteen days from the receipt of the order from - Supreme Court
Counsel for the petitioner was also asked by Supreme Court to move formal applications in that behalf to the Chief Justice of the High Court.
Judgment & Decree
IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, C.J.
By this common order, we intend to dispose of Civil Petitions Nos.673 and 674 of 1999. arising out of identical interim orders, dated 25-1-1999 and 28-1-1999 of the Lahore High Court passed in Writ Petitions Nos.981 and 1181 of 1999.
2. This is a service matter. The grievance of the petitioner is that the jurisdiction of the High Court is barred in such cases and the Federal Service Tribunal has the exclusive jurisdiction in respect of such matters as contemplated by Article 212 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. It is contended that the learned Judge in Chambers has fallen into an error in granting an interim injunction to the effect that no final order shall be passed in the disciplinary inquiry proceedings initiated against respondent No. 1.
3. Raja Muhammad Akram, Senior Advocate Supreme Court appearing on behalf of the petitioners, vehemently argued that the attention of the learned Single Judge was drawn through C.M. No.3 of 1999 to section 2-A of Service Tribunals Act, 1973 and it was pointed out that the Hon'ble High Court had no jurisdiction in the matter because respondent No. l has been declared to be a civil servant and the jurisdiction in the matter vests exclusively in Federal Service Tribunal. However, the Hon'ble Single Judge did not dismiss the Writ Petition and vacate the Stay Order as prayed for and issued notice to respondent No. 1.
4. It is not necessary to go into merits of the case at this intermediate stage. This Court normally does not interfere with the interim orders of the High Court except in exceptional circumstances. Be that as it may, in the interest of expeditious disposal of the matter, we direct the Registrar, Lahore High Court to fix C.M.3 of 1999 in Writ Petitions Nos.981 and 1181 of 1999, before the learned Judge in Chambers seized of the matter forthwith so that the same is finally disposed of after hearing the parties within fifteen days from the receipt of this order. The learned counsel for the petitioners shall also move formal applications in this behalf to the learned Chief Justice, Lahore High Court.
5. With the above observation, both the petition are disposed of. M.B.A./U-1/S Order accordingly.