2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE ZAKI Versus SECRETARY PAKISTAN CENTRAL COTTON COMMITTEE, NINISTRY OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE, KARACHI and others
| Citation | 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Khalid Alvi, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE ZAKI Versus SECRETARY PAKISTAN CENTRAL COTTON COMMITTEE, NINISTRY OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE, KARACHI and others |
| Primary Law | Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Khalid Alvi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE ZAKI Versus SECRETARY PAKISTAN CENTRAL COTTON COMMITTEE, NINISTRY OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE, KARACHI and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Kanwar Intizar Muhammad Khan for Petitioner.
- Muhammad Qasim Khan, A.A.-G. assisted by Hushmat Hussain Naqvi for Respondents.
- Muhammad Qasim Khan, A.A.‑G. assisted by Hushmat Hussain Naqvi for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 5(2)
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXIX, R.2(3)-- Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Constitutional petition-- Maintainability
Interim order, enforcement of-- Contention of civil servant was that the interim order passed by Service Tribunal was not complied with by the authorities and there was no provision in Service Tribunals Act, 1973, for enforcing the order therefore, Constitutional petition was the only remedy
Service Tribunal being a Civil Court within the meaning of S.5(2) of Service Tribunals Act, 1973, it could get its order enforced under O.XXXIX, R.2(3) C.P.C. and other enabling provisions of the Civil Procedure Code
Civil servant in the present case having alternate and efficacious remedy available to him under the law his Constitutional petition was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
5. The Federal Services Tribunal is a Civil Court within the meaning of section 5(2) of the Services Tribunals Act, 1973, which reads as follows:‑ "(5) Power of Tribunals (1) ........ (2) A Tribunal shall, for the purpose of deciding any appeal, be deemed to be a Civil Court and shall have the same powers as are vested in such Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act V of 1908), including the powers of:‑ (a) enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath; (b) compelling the production of documents; (c) issuing commission for the examination of witnesses and documents.
6. Since the Federal Services Tribunal is a Civil Court for the purpose of deciding any appeal, therefore, it has all the power of a Civil Court provided under the Code of Civil Procedure. Under Order 39 Rule 2(3) C.P.C., in case of disobedience a Civil Court has the power to detain a person for a term not exceeding six months. The relevant provision is as under:‑ (2) Injunction to restrain repetition or continuance of breach. (1) ............................... (2) ............................... (3) In case of disobedience, or of breach of any such terms, the Court granting an injunction may order the property of the person guilty of such disobedience or breach to be attached, and may also order such person to be detained in the (‑‑ prison for a term not exceeding six months, unless in the meantime the Court directs his release. (4) ................................
7. In view of the above, the Federal Services Tribunal being a Civil Court within the meaning of section 5(2) of the Services Tribunals pct, 1973, it can get its order enforced under Order 39, Rule 2(3), C.P.C. and other enabling provisions of the same Code.
8. In the above circumstances, since the petitioner has an alternate and efficacious remedy available to him under the law, therefore, this petition is not maintainable and is accordingly dismissed. Q.M.H./M‑1248/L Petition dismissed.