1990 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
AZIZ AHMED Versus KARACHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION through
| Citation | 1990 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi High Court |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian, C.J. and Abdul Rahim Kazi, J |
| Parties | AZIZ AHMED Versus KARACHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION through |
| Primary Law | Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi High Court bench comprising: Ajmal Mian, C.J. and Abdul Rahim Kazi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (AZIZ AHMED Versus KARACHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION through). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Dr. Hameed Ahmed Ayaz for Petitioner.
- S.M. Muslim Naqvi for Respondent No. 1.
Headnotes / Summary
R. 10
Employee working under Karachi Municipal Corporation and having Grade-H, was removed from service
Employee filed appeal against his removal before Mayor of Karachi, which first was accepted directing his reinstatement, but subsequently was dismissed on ground that Competent Authority to entertain appeal was the Government-- Competent Appellate Authority to entertain appeal against order passed by Municipal Commissioner admittedly being Government, petitioner directed to approach Government with appeal
High Court, however, observed that employee could file application for condonation of delay if any and Appellate Authority would dispose of that application in accordance with law.
Judgment & Decree
AJMAL MIAN, C J.--It seems that the petitioner, who was working as Veterinary Compounder in the respondent No.1 Corporation, was removed from service by an order dated 2-8-1988. The grade of the petitioner was 8-Grade. He filed an appeal against the above order before the Mayor of Karachi, who by his order dated 31-10-1988 directed the reinstatement of the petitioner. In spite of the above order, the petitioner was not reinstated and, therefore, he filed the present petition. We had issued a pre-admission notice to the respondent No.1 in response to which Mr. Muslim Naqvi along with Lt. (Rtd.) Majid Hussain Director Administration, is present and has shown us the relevant file, which contains an order passed by the Mayor on 26th February, 1989, stating therein that the competent authority was the .Government and, therefore, the order dated 31-10-1988 was withdrawn. It seems that under Rule 10 E & D Rules, the competent appellate authority to entertain an appeal against an order passed by the Municipal Commissioner is the Government. It will be, therefore, advisable to the petitioner to approach the Government with the appeal. However, Dr. Hameed Ahmed Ayaz, learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that because of the order of the Mayor dated 31-10-1988 ordering reinstatement the petitioner was misled and, therefore, did not file the appeal in time in terms of the above rule. He, therefore, has prayed that this Court may make an observation to the effect that the delay in filing of the proposed appeal will be condoned. It will suffice to observe that the petitioner may make an application for the condonation of the delay on the above ground and the Government will consider the same and will dispose of the same in accordance with law. With the above observation, the petition is dismissed in limine. H.B.T./A-629/K Order accordingly.