1990 PLP 1502 (CLC)
RIAZ AHMAD TAHIR‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE PAKISTAN RAILWAY through its General Manager
| Citation | 1990 PLP 1502 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | RIAZ AHMAD TAHIR‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE PAKISTAN RAILWAY through its General Manager |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 1502 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 1502 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 1502 (CLC) (RIAZ AHMAD TAHIR‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE PAKISTAN RAILWAY through its General Manager). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- ‑‑‑‑Art. 199‑‑‑Constitutional jurisdiction‑‑‑Counsel for respondent after consulting record, conceded that aggrieved person was not granted any personal hearing before the impugned order was passed‑‑‑Case was remanded to respondent Authority to decide matter afresh after addressing themselves to the state of facts and the law which governed rights of parties.
- Hariz Muhammad Saeed for Petitioner.
- Ch. Fazle Hussain for Respondents Nos.l and 2.
- Ch. Riayasat Ali for Respondent No.3.
- 4. In Writ Petition No. 3826 of 1986 the grievance is by those persons over whom Riaz Ahmed Tahir, petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2185 of 1987, has been inducted into service in changed category. According to the learned counsel Hafiz Vohammjd Saeed Advocate such a transfer of category or change of position stood banned as back as year 1979 by a Presidential Order. In so far as Riaz Ahmeh Tahir, petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2185 of 1987, is concerned, substance of his grievance is that he was not heard in support of his case.
Judgment & Decree
Ch. Fazle Hussain for Respondents Nos.l and
2. Ch. Riayasat Ali for Respondent No.3. Date of hearing: 31st October, 1989. These two writ petitions (3826 of 1986 and 2185 of 1987) arise out of the grievance of the petitioner in W.P.No. 2185 of 1987 in respect of the treatment meted out to him by the Railways authorities as a result of change of his category whereas connected Writ Petition No. 3826 of 1986 is by those set of persons who are adversly affected by such a change of category.
2. I need not go into facts and circumstances of the cases in view of the order that I propose to pass.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners in both the writ petitions are one in saying that they have not been heard by the Railways authorities before the impugned orders were passed or the consequential acts were performed.
4. In Writ Petition No. 3826 of 1986 the grievance is by those persons over whom Riaz Ahmed Tahir, petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2185 of 1987, has been inducted into service in changed category. According to the learned counsel Hafiz Vohammjd Saeed Advocate such a transfer of category or change of position stood banned as back as year 1979 by a Presidential Order. In so far as Riaz Ahmeh Tahir, petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2185 of 1987, is concerned, substance of his grievance is that he was not heard in support of his case.
5. Syed Shamim Ahmed, Assistant Personnel Officer of the Railways is cut with the record. He has consulted the record and states that the grievance he two parties to the extent that they were not granted any personal hearing before the impugned order was passed is correct. In such a situation, I think the TCI, course is to send the cases back to the Railways administration to decide m afresh after addressing themselves to the state of facts and the law which governs the rights of the parties and to render a just decision. Both sides i.e. gory of persons will be heard.
6. Both the connected writ petitions are disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs. M.Y.H./R‑209/L Petitions allowed.