PLC(CS) 2017

2017 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

SHAKEEL AHMAD Versus ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT through Secretary and 3 others

Jurisdiction / Court
Peshawar High Court
Decided Date
Writ Petition No.2414-P of 2013, decided on 7th April, 2015.
Honorable Judges
Waqar Ahmad Seth and Irshad Qaiser, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2017 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Forum / Court Peshawar High Court
Bench Members Waqar Ahmad Seth and Irshad Qaiser, JJ
Parties SHAKEEL AHMAD Versus ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT through Secretary and 3 others
Primary Law Civil service
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2017 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?

This judgment primarily cites: Civil service as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2017 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?

The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar High Court bench comprising: Waqar Ahmad Seth and Irshad Qaiser, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2017 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (SHAKEEL AHMAD Versus ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT through Secretary and 3 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Civil service

Representation

  • Jamil Khan for Petitioner.
  • Tariq Yousafzai and Rab Nawaz Khan, A.A.G. for Respondents.
  • 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.4 stated at the bar and has also contended in his para-wise comments that the daughter of respondent No.4, namely Mst. Nazish Javid is entitled to the accommodation in question after the retirement of her father under the amendments made in the Residential Accommodation (Procedure for Allotment) Rules, 1980, vide notification dated 22nd February, 1992, in Rule-4 which reads as under:--
  • 5. It is admitted at the bar by the counsel for respondent No.4 that said daughter namely Mst. Nazish Javid, is a married employee. Learned AAG present in the court produced a clarification of the KPK, Law, Parliamentary Affairs and Human Rights Department, vide advice No.OP15(94) LD/2011, dated 23.08.2011 wherein it was held that:--

Headnotes / Summary

Allotment of residential accommodation

Petitioner had asked for issuance of an appropriate writ directing the respondent to hand over vacant possession of the house allotted to him

Contention of respondent was that her daughter was entitled to the accommodation in question after his retirement

Validity

Rules for allotment of residential accommodation were beneficial and remedial in nature which could not be equated with the law of inheritance

When daughter of respondent was married she was then dependent of her husband and not of her father irrespective of the fact whether she was residing with her father or not

Respondent had retired from service and grace period of three months had also expired

Petitioner being new allottee was entitled for possession of the house already allotted to him

Respondent was directed by High Court to vacate the house already allotted to the petitioner and handover the same to him in accordance with Residential Accommodation Policy and Rules formulated therefor irrespective of any stay order granted by any court of law

Constitutional petition was accepted, in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

WAQAR AHMAD SETH, J.

Petitioner through the instant writ petition has asked for issuance of an appropriate writ directing the respondents to hand over vacant possession of the quarter already allotted to him.

2. The respondents attended the Court and submitted that notice has been issued to Mr. Razaq Ahmad Javed, respondent, to vacate Government accommodation after the expiry of grace period. However, they stated that daughter of respondent No.4 filed a civil suit in the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Peshawar and got a stay order over there, who is not party to the proceedings.

3. Arguments heard and record perused.

4. Learned counsel for respondent No.4 stated at the bar and has also contended in his para-wise comments that the daughter of respondent No.4, namely Mst. Nazish Javid is entitled to the accommodation in question after the retirement of her father under the amendments made in the Residential Accommodation (Procedure for Allotment) Rules, 1980, vide notification dated 22nd February, 1992, in Rule-4 which reads as under:-- "Provided that where a civil servant to whom a residential accommodation has been allotted retires or dies during service, the real son or daughter of the retired or deceased allottee may be allotted, out of turn, an accommodation of his/her entitlement, subject to the condition that he/she is otherwise eligible for allotment of residential accommodation under these rules".

5. It is admitted at the bar by the counsel for respondent No.4 that said daughter namely Mst. Nazish Javid, is a married employee. Learned AAG present in the court produced a clarification of the KPK, Law, Parliamentary Affairs and Human Rights Department, vide advice No.OP15(94) LD/2011, dated 23.08.2011 wherein it was held that:-- "I am directed to refer to your letter No. EO (Admn) 34-C Civil Quarter 2011 dated 29.07.2011 on the subject noted above and to state that it is the general principle of law that a daughter who is married or not, is entitled to inherit in the estate property of her deceased father according to her legal Shari share. But upon her marriage she is excluded from the category/list of dependent children of her father and becomes totally dependent upon her husband. Therefore, a married daughter whether she resides with her father or not, is not entitled to out of turn residential accommodation of her deceased or retired father".

6. Even otherwise, rules for allotment of residential accommodation are beneficial and remedial in nature which cannot be equated with the law of inheritance. Admittedly, when daughter of respondent No.4 is married she is then dependent of her husband and not of her father, irrespective of the fact that whether she is residing with her father or not.

7. Since respondent No.4 has retired from service on 1.3.2011 and the grace period of three months has also been expired, hence the petitioner being a new allottee is entitled for possession of the quarter already allotted to him.

8. For the reasons discussed above, this writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to vacate the quarter already allotted to the petitioner and handover the same to him strictly in accordance with the Residential Accommodation Policy and Rules formulated thereof, irrespective of any stay order granted by any court of law. ZC/216/P Petition allowed.