1989 PLP 692 (SCMR)
KHALID MAHM00D BALUCH and another — Petitioners Versus SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 692 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Saad Saood Jan and Ali Hussain Qazilbash, JJ |
| Parties | KHALID MAHM00D BALUCH and another — Petitioners Versus SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 692 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 692 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Saad Saood Jan and Ali Hussain Qazilbash, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 692 (SCMR) (KHALID MAHM00D BALUCH and another — Petitioners Versus SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Muhammad Azam Rasul, Advocate Supreme Court and Rana Maqbool Ahmad Oadri, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Ch. Muhammad Aslam, Advocate-on-Record and Ch. Fazal-i-Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 14th November, 1988.
- Malik Muhammad Azam Rasul, Advocate Supreme Court and Rana Maqbool Ahmad Oadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Ch. Muhammad Aslam, Advocate‑on‑Record and Ch. Fazal‑i‑Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the orders of the Federal Service Tribunal dated 29-5-1984 passed in Appeal Nos.132(L)/81 and 134(L)/81).
Art:212(3)--Leave to appeal was granted to consider whether Federal Government had approved exclusion of Grade-16 posts from the scope of review of irregular appointments made between 1-1-1972 and 5-7-1977, vide its demi -official letter No.4/6/79-REV-1(XVI), dated 28th July, 1979 and as such appointments of petitioners could be termed as regular appointments.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑Art:212(3)‑‑Leave to appeal was granted to consider whether Federal Government had approved exclusion of Grade‑16 posts from the scope of review of irregular appointments made between 1‑1‑1972 and 5‑7‑1977, vide its demi -official letter No.4/6/79‑REV‑1(XVI), dated 28th July, 1979 and as such appointments of petitioners could be termed as regular appointments. Malik Muhammad Azam Rasul, Advocate Supreme Court and Rana Maqbool Ahmad Oadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners. Ch. Muhammad Aslam, Advocate‑on‑Record and Ch. Fazal‑i‑Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents. Date of hearing: 14th November, 1988. ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, J.‑‑These two petitions bearing Nos.861 and 862 of 1984 are against the orders of the Federal Service Tribunal dated 6‑6‑1984 and 29‑5‑1984.
2. The two petitioners were appointed as Assistant Administrator in Grade 16 in the Evacuee Trust Board vide orders dated 20‑3‑1976 and 4‑6‑1976, respectively. After serving for about three years the services of both the petitioners were terminated through two separate orders bearing the same number dated 23rd April, 1979. They t‑led a number of representations before the President of Pakistan which were ultimately rejected through letter dated 27thSeptember, 1981. Their appeals before the Service Tribunal were also rejected on 29‑5‑1984 on the ground of their appointment being irregular.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners who vehemently contended that the Federal Cabinet had approved the proposal to exclude Grade 16 posts from the scope of review of irregular appointments made between 1‑1‑1972 and 5‑7‑1977 and as such their appointments could be termed as regular appointments. Reference was pointedly invited to demi‑official letter No.4/6/79 REV.I(XV1), dated 28th July 1979 from the Establishment Division. The above quoted letter, the learned counsel submitted, fully covered the cases of the A petitioners and the authorities bound to implement the same and review the orders of removal of the petitioners from service.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners we think the submissions made by him merit consideration. We, therefore, grant leave in both the matters. Security Rs.2,000 in each case. A.A./K‑85/S Leave to appeal granted.