SCMR 2001

2001 PLP 575 (SCMR)

MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE and others — Petitioners Versus GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB through Chief Secretary and others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 1935-L of 1999, decided on 22nd November, 2000.
Honorable Judges
Abdur Rehman Khan and Deedar Hussain Shah, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2001 PLP 575 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Abdur Rehman Khan and Deedar Hussain Shah, JJ
Parties MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE and others — Petitioners Versus GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB through Chief Secretary and others — Respondents
Primary Law Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2001 PLP 575 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2001 PLP 575 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Abdur Rehman Khan and Deedar Hussain Shah, JJ.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2001 PLP 575 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE and others — Petitioners Versus GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB through Chief Secretary and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)

Representation

  • Ch. Mushtaq Masood, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Masood Akhtar, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
  • Dr. Qazi Mohy-ud-Din, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents.
  • Date of hearing: 22nd November, 2000.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment/order, dated 16-9-1999, of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, passed in Appeal No. 1992 of 1993).

S. 4

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212(3)

Joint appeal before Service Tribunal

Delay in filing of appeal

Rules which prevailed at the time of induction of civil servant in service

Applicability

Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to consider as to whether the civil servants could legally claim to be governed by the Rules which prevailed at the time of their induction in service, or they had no vested right to claim so and they would be governed by the amended Rules; whether the appeal before Service Tribunal suffered from laches/undue delay and misjoinder of parties and whether joint appeal before the Tribunal by all the civil servants was not competent.

Judgment & Decree

The petitioners have assailed the correctness of the impugned judgment, dated 16-9-1999, of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, whereby the appeal filed by them against the departmental authorities was dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners by referring to pages 122, 124, 125 and 126, explained the delay which occurred in approaching the Service Tribunal. According to these pages, the petitioners filed a writ petition before the High Court, filed representation and approached the competent authority to decide their representation. Learned counsel also explained that the rules could not be changed to their detriment and that this aspect of the case has not been considered in correct perspective by the learned Tribunal.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the Caveator submitted that the appeal before the Tribunal was not properly instituted, as the Board, which was the competent authority in the matter, was not impleaded as party. Moreover, the joint appeal by the petitioners in the Tribunal was also stated to be bad in law.

4. We grant leave to appeal to consider the following points:-- (i) Whether the petitioners can legally claim to be governed by the rules which prevailed at the time of their induction in service, or they have no vested right to claim so and they will be governed by the amended rules? (ii) Whether the appeal before the Tribunal suffered from laches/undue delay and misjoinder of parties? and (iii) Whether joint appeal before the Board by all the petitioners was not competent?

5. We are not inclined to grant any interim relief in the matter as it would adversely affect the function of the department before the matter is finally concluded by this Court. However, the main appeal may be fixed for hearing within six months. Q.M.H./M.A.K./M-208/S Leave granted.