1976 PLP [C (PLC(CS))
HAJI MUHAMMD ARBAB Versus PROVINCE OF SIND THROUGH SECRETARY, REVENUE, BOARD OF
| Citation | 1976 PLP [C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | 1976 P L C C. S. T. 133 |
| Bench Members | Hamzo Khan M. Kureshi, Chairman, Abdul Kadir and Abdul Wali |
| Parties | HAJI MUHAMMD ARBAB Versus PROVINCE OF SIND THROUGH SECRETARY, REVENUE, BOARD OF |
| Primary Law | Sind Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1976 PLP [C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Sind Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1976 PLP [C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the 1976 P L C C. S. T. 133 bench comprising: Hamzo Khan M. Kureshi, Chairman, Abdul Kadir and Abdul Wali.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1976 PLP [C (PLC(CS)) (HAJI MUHAMMD ARBAB Versus PROVINCE OF SIND THROUGH SECRETARY, REVENUE, BOARD OF). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Naraindas C. Motiani for Appellant.
- HAMZO KHAN M. KURESHI (CHAIRMAN).‑Heard Mr. Naraindas. The prayer of appellant is that he is a "fit person to be enlisted in the seniority list of 1971 and to act as a Mukhtiarkar" and that he should remain as Mukhtiarkar till this appeal is decided. Whether he is a fit person to hold particular post is beyond the jurisdiction of this Tribunal as laid down by Proviso to section 4 of Sind Service Tribunals Act, 1973. The Advocate supports that we should ignore this Proviso as it is repugnant to the provision of the present Constitution. We have no constitutional jurisdiction hence we cannot enter into that question. Secondly we are the creatures of the Sind Service Tribunals Act, 1973, and we cannot question any of its provisions. The plea of the Advocate is misconceived. The appeal is based on "fitness' for a particular post hence it is beyond its own jurisdiction. It is accordingly dismissed.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑ S. 4, Proviso and Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑Scope‑Jurisdic tion of Tribunal‑Fitness to hold a particular post‑Beyond jurisdiction of Tribunal‑Contention that Proviso to S. 4 was repugnant to Constitution‑Tribunal, held, creature of Sind Service Tribunals Act, 1973 could not question its provisions.
Judgment & Decree
HAMZO KHAN M. KURESHI (CHAIRMAN).‑Heard Mr. Naraindas. The prayer of appellant is that he is a "fit person to be enlisted in the seniority list of 1971 and to act as a Mukhtiarkar" and that he should remain as Mukhtiarkar till this appeal is decided. Whether he is a fit person to hold particular post is beyond the jurisdiction of this Tribunal as laid down by Proviso to section 4 of Sind Service Tribunals Act, 1973. The Advocate supports that we should ignore this Proviso as it is repugnant to the provision of the present Constitution. We have no constitutional jurisdiction hence we cannot enter into that question. Secondly we are the creatures of the Sind Service Tribunals Act, 1973, and we cannot question any of its provisions. The plea of the Advocate is misconceived. The appeal is based on "fitness' for a particular post hence it is beyond its own jurisdiction. It is accordingly dismissed.