2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Syed AIJAZ AHMED SHAH Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others
| Citation | 2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi High Court |
| Bench Members | Anwar Zaheer Jamali, C.J. and Faisal Arab, J |
| Parties | Syed AIJAZ AHMED SHAH Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others |
| Primary Law | Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance (XVII of 2000) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance (XVII of 2000) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi High Court bench comprising: Anwar Zaheer Jamali, C.J. and Faisal Arab, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (Syed AIJAZ AHMED SHAH Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Azizur Rehman for Petitioner.
- Sanaullah Noor Ghouri for Respondents Nos.2 to 4.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 3 & 10
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Constitutional petition
Remedy of appeal was available to petitioner under S.10 of Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000 which was quite adequate and proper
Under provisions of such special statute, constitutional petition was not competent
Petition was dismissed with the observation that petitioner could avail remedy of appeal available to him under S.10 of Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000. Anwar Pervez v. Chairman, Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Abbottabad 2005 SCMR 1603 ref.
Judgment & Decree
Through this petition, petitioner Syed Aijaz Hussain Shah, who was removed from service by respondents Nos.2 and 3 vide notification, dated 28-9-2006 in exercise of powers under the provisions of Removal from Service Ordinance XVII (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000, has challenged such action of the respondents. In paragraph seven of the petition, he has also stated about filing of the departmental appeal/representation before the Chairman of PTCL which has not yet been decided by him. At the outset, Mr. Sanaullah Noor Chouri, learned counsel for the respondents, has made reference to the parawise comments submitted on behalf of the respondents to show that the remedy of appeal under section 10 of the Ordinance (ibid) available to the petitioner was an adequate and proper remedy for the petitioner against his removal from service under the provisions of such special statute, therefore, this petition is incompetent: He has further made reference to paragraph 7 of the comments to show that the petitioner has submitted appeal before the Secretary I.T. Ministry of IT& T; Islamabad, which is yet to be decided by the said Secretary. In support of his argument that in the given circumstances where adequate and proper remedy is available to the petitioner under section 10 of the said Ordinance before the Service Tribunal and this petition is not maintainable, he has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Anwar Pervez v. Chairman Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Abbottabad 2005 SCMR 1603. Keeping in view the clear language of section 10 of the Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000 and the dictum laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in the above referred case, we dismiss this petition with the observation that in case the petitioner has availed the remedy under section 10 of the Ordinance (ibid), he may pursue the same or he may avail it now, but strictly in accordance with law. H.B.T./A-88/K Petition dismissed.