1986 PLP 1825(1) (SCMR)
Rana MUHAMMAD ANWAR — Petitioner Versus PAKISTAN and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1986 PLP 1825(1) (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Haleem, C.J., S. A. Nusrat and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ |
| Parties | Rana MUHAMMAD ANWAR — Petitioner Versus PAKISTAN and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 1825(1) (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 1825(1) (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Haleem, C.J., S. A. Nusrat and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 1825(1) (SCMR) (Rana MUHAMMAD ANWAR — Petitioner Versus PAKISTAN and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 13th August, 1986.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Federal Service Tribunal at Karachi, dated 2-5-1984 passed in Appeal No. 105(K) of 1982). --Art. 212(3)--Airport Security Force (Service) Rules, 1978, Rr.12(7) tt 12(2)--Interpretation of Rules--Ambiguity or back of clarity with regard to interpretation of rules--Leave granted to examine reconciliation and interpretation of rules given by Service Tribunal. Petitioner in Person.
Judgment & Decree
S.A.NUSRAT, J.‑‑This petition is from the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal whereby, the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed. 2. The learned Tribunal has itself conceded in the impugned judgment that there was some ambiguity or lack of clarity with regard to the interpretation of rule 12(7) and rule 12(2) of the A.S.F. (Service) Rules, 1978. The learned Tribunal has attempted to reconcile the two rules and the interpretation so given needs examination. Leave to appeal is accordingly granted. The appeal will be heard on the same record. M. I. Leave granted.