1984 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Rana FAZAL ELAHI Versus DEPUTY DIRECTOR, FOOD AND OTHERS
| Citation | 1984 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Saad Saood Jan, J |
| Parties | Rana FAZAL ELAHI Versus DEPUTY DIRECTOR, FOOD AND OTHERS |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1984 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1984 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Saad Saood Jan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1984 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (Rana FAZAL ELAHI Versus DEPUTY DIRECTOR, FOOD AND OTHERS). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Rao Hamid Mukhtar Khan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑ S. 4 and Provisional Constitution Order (1 of 1981), Art 9‑Suspension order‑Legality of‑Within exclusive jurisdiction of Service Tribunal‑Cannot be challenged in writ jurisdiction. Muhammad Sadiq Khokhar v. Engineer‑in‑Chief N L R 1979 Service (S C) 99 rel. S. H. M. Rizvi v. Maqsood Ahmad P L D 1981 S C 612 distinguished.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑ S. 4 and Provisional Constitution Order (1 of 1981), Art 9‑Suspension order‑Legality of‑Within exclusive jurisdiction of Service Tribunal‑Cannot be challenged in writ jurisdiction. Muhammad Sadiq Khokhar v. Engineer‑in‑Chief N L R 1979 Service (S C) 99 rel. S. H. M. Rizvi v. Maqsood Ahmad P L D 1981 S C 612 distinguished. Rao Hamid Mukhtar Khan for Petitioner. The petitioner is a civil servant. He challenges the legality of the order whereby he has been placed under suspension. I am afraid this! Court cannot examine this matter as it falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Service Tribunal. See Muhammad Sadiq Khokhar v. Engineer‑in‑Chief (N L R 1979 Service (S C) 99). Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to S. H: M. Rizvi v. Maqsood Ahmad (P L D 1981 S C 612) but that is not relevant for the petitioner is not seeking an early disposal of his appeal by the department but challenging the very legality of the order of suspension. Dismissed. A. E. Petition dismissed.