1990 PLP 1448 (SCMR)
Establishment Division and 2 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus Major (Retd.) WAZIR AHMAD‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1990 PLP 1448 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | S. Usman Ali Shah and Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry, JJ |
| Parties | Establishment Division and 2 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus Major (Retd.) WAZIR AHMAD‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 1448 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 1448 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: S. Usman Ali Shah and Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 1448 (SCMR) (Establishment Division and 2 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus Major (Retd.) WAZIR AHMAD‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- MA. Siddiqui, Deputy Attorney‑General and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners (in all the Petitions).
- M. Bilal, Advocate Supreme Court and Manzoor Ilahi, Advocate‑on- Record for Respondents (in C.P.S.L.A. No. 315‑R of 1989).
- Nemo for Respondent (in C.P.S.L.A. No.314‑R of 1989).
- Nemo for Respondent (in C.P.S.L.A.No.317‑R of 1989).
- B.A. Ansari, Advocate Supreme Court and Manzoor Ilahi, Advocate‑on- Record for Respondent (in C.P.S.LA. 605‑R of 1989).
- Date of hearing: 11th February, 1990.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the orders of the Federal Service Tribunal dated 5‑3‑1989, 20‑4‑1989, 6‑3‑.1989, 5‑3‑1989, 23‑2‑1989, and 27‑8‑1989, respectively, passed in Appeals Nos. 249‑R, 383‑R, 416‑R and V)4‑R of 1987 and 41‑R and 36‑R of 1988). ‑‑‑‑Art. 212(3)‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted to consider the contention that conclusions drawn by the Service Tribunal holding the respondents entitled to their full pay of the post in addition to the Army pension could not be allowed to stand under the law and that said findings were the result of the wrong and incorrect interpretation of the various provisions of law, Rules and Regulations and, therefore, unsustainable‑‑‑Contentions raised being of great public importance, needed further examination. In Person (in C.P.S.LA.No.316‑R of 1989). In person (in C.P.S.L.A. No.532‑R of 1989).
Judgment & Decree
S. USMAN ALI SHAH, J: ‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought by the petitioners in all the above‑mentioned 6 petitions against the judgments of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, whereby service appeals of the respondents to the effect that their Army pension shall not be deducted from their pay of civil posts, was accepted in their favour by the impugned judgments mentioned above. The facts involved in these petitions are of similar nature, therefore, these are disposed of together. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and in some petitions, the respondents in person. In support of these petitions it is contended that the conclusion drawn by the learned Tribunal in these cases of similar nature, holding the respondents entitled to their full pay of the post in addition to the Army pension cannot be allowed to stand under the law and the findings arrived at by the Tribunal are the result of the wrong and incorrect interpretation of the various provisions of law, rules and regulations and, therefore, these arc unsustainable. After hearing the learned counsel, we are satisfied that the contentions raised in support of these petitions are of great public importance which need further examination. Leave to appeal is, therefore, granted. Appeals shall be made ready on the present record with permission to parties to file additional documents, if any. A.A./F‑172/S Leave granted.