1902 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
MUHAMMAD SHAHPAL QADRI and another Versus A.K. GOVERNMENT COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED and 3 others
| Citation | 1902 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | (AJ&K) High Court |
| Bench Members | Khawaja Muhammad Saeed, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SHAHPAL QADRI and another Versus A.K. GOVERNMENT COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED and 3 others |
| Primary Law | (b) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIlI of 1974), (a) Civil service |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1902 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: (b) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIlI of 1974), (a) Civil service as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1902 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the (AJ&K) High Court bench comprising: Khawaja Muhammad Saeed, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1902 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (MUHAMMAD SHAHPAL QADRI and another Versus A.K. GOVERNMENT COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED and 3 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Khawaja Noorul Amin for Petitioners.
- Ghulam Mustafa Mughal assisted by Ch. Muhammad Akhtar for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Promotion of respondent was not in accordance with rules and procedure-- Rules framed and procedure laid down must necessarily be followed
Where some act was required to be done in a particular manner then that act should be performed in that way alone or not at all
Promotion of respondent was, thus, in derogation of established scheme of law of the establishment concerned. PLD 1989 SC 75; PLD 1989 Lah. 1 and 523; PLD `1988 Kar.169; PLD 1990 Kar. 186; PLD 1990 Quetta 41, PLD 1989 Kar. 157; PLD 1912 Kar. 54; PLD 1953 Lah. 163; PLD 1965 SC (Pak.) 201; PLD 1961 SC 531; PLD 1959 SC 210; 1971 PLC (C.S.) 5.30; 1971 SCMR 569 and 1971 SCMR 566 ref. PLD 1980 Lah. 337 rel.
S. 44
Constitutional jurisdiction, exercise of
Order of promotion of respondent being in derogation of established scheme of law of establishment, petitioner could seek his remedy through representation before Board of Directors of establishment and not though Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court
Petitioner also like other employees of the establishment was inducted into service on basis of agreement
In absence of proof that any statutory duty was involved or that any legal right was required to be enforced or that performance of public duty was being claimed, a mandamus or an order of mandamus could not issue
Petition was dismissed in circumstances. Muhammad Shall v. Chairman, A.K. Logging and Saw Mills Corporation PLD 1985 SC (AJK) 119 and 1983 SCMR 156 ret'.
Judgment & Decree
Promotion of respondent was not in accordance with rules and procedure-- Rules framed and procedure laid down must necessarily be followed
Where some act was required to be done in a particular manner then that act should be performed in that way alone or not at all
Promotion of respondent was, thus, in derogation of established scheme of law of the establishment concerned. PLD 1989 SC 75; PLD 1989 Lah. 1 and 523; PLD `1988 Kar.169; PLD 1990 Kar. 186; PLD 1990 Quetta 41, PLD 1989 Kar. 157; PLD 1912 Kar. 54; PLD 1953 Lah. 163; PLD 1965 SC (Pak.) 201; PLD 1961 SC 531; PLD 1959 SC 210; 1971 PLC (C.S.) 5.30; 1971 SCMR 569 and 1971 SCMR 566 ref. PLD 1980 Lah. 337 rel. (b) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIlI of 1974)
S. 44
Constitutional jurisdiction, exercise of
Order of promotion of respondent being in derogation of established scheme of law of establishment, petitioner could seek his remedy through representation before Board of Directors of establishment and not though Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court
Petitioner also like other employees of the establishment was inducted into service on basis of agreement
In absence of proof that any statutory duty was involved or that any legal right was required to be enforced or that performance of public duty was being claimed, a mandamus or an order of mandamus could not issue
Petition was dismissed in circumstances. Muhammad Shall v. Chairman, A.K. Logging and Saw Mills Corporation PLD 1985 SC (AJK) 119 and 1983 SCMR 156 ret'. Khawaja Noorul Amin for Petitioners. Ghulam Mustafa Mughal assisted by Ch. Muhammad Akhtar for Respondents.