1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
GUL DAALI Versus INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE, N.-W.F.P. and 2 others
| Citation | 1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar High Court |
| Bench Members | Jawaid Nawaz Khan Gandapur and Hamid Saeed Malik, JJ |
| Parties | GUL DAALI Versus INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE, N.-W.F.P. and 2 others |
| Primary Law | North-West Frontier Province Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: North-West Frontier Province Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar High Court bench comprising: Jawaid Nawaz Khan Gandapur and Hamid Saeed Malik, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (GUL DAALI Versus INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE, N.-W.F.P. and 2 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ali Khan Qazi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
R. 4
Constitutltalt of Pakistan (1973), Arts 199 & 212
Constitutional petition- --Civil servant
Removal/dismissal from service in 1984
Laches-- Bar of jurisdiction of High Court
Civil servant's departmental appeal was dismissed in 1985
Period of about 14 years had elapsed between his dismissal and filing of Constitutional petition
Such period, in service matter, could be treated as sufficient laches to prevent civil servant from raising grievance at such belated stage
Grievance of civil servant for re instatement in service, related to terms and conditions of his service for which there was proper forum provided for under the law
Jurisdiction of High Court was specifically barred in such matter
Constitutional petition was not maintainable in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
HAMID SAEED MALIK, J.
In this Constitutional petition the writ petitioner has questioned the order dated 5-9-1984 of respondent No. 3 (S.P., Kohat) whereby he was dismissed from service on the basis of report registered vide: F. I. R. No. 78, dated 6-3-1983 under section 302/34, P. P. C. The petitioner appealed against such order of dismissal before respondent No.2 (D.I.-G., Kohat) but vide: order dated 3-1-1985 the appeal was dismissed. Thereafter, the petitioner also addressed another appeal to the Inspector-General, N.-W.F,P. (respondent No. 1), but the petitioner received no reply from the side of respondent No 1 till filing of the present Constitutional Petition. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have also gone through the documents placed on file. The writ petition in hand is, however, not maintainable on the grounds of laches and question of jurisdiction of this Court as well. The petitioner was dismissed from service on 5-9-1984 and his appeal was also dismissed in the year 1985. Thus, a period of about 14 years has already elapsed between his dismissal and filing of this writ petition. which period, to service matters, can be treated as sufficient laches to prevent the petitioner from raising such a plea at such a belated stage. Secondly, the grievance of the petitioner for re-instatement is a matter relating to the terms and conditions of his service for which there is a proper forum provided for under the law and the jurisdiction of this Court has specifically been barred under Article 212(2) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The writ petition, being misconceiv6d, is not worth entertainable and is, therefore, dismissed in limine. A.A./2220/P Petition dismissed.