2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Versus ALLAH DAD MASHORI and others
| Citation | 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Rana Bhagwandas and Syed Deedar Hussain Shah, JJ |
| Parties | WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Versus ALLAH DAD MASHORI and others |
| Primary Law | Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 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 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Rana Bhagwandas and Syed Deedar Hussain Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Versus ALLAH DAD MASHORI and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mazhar Ali B. Chohan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner (in all petitions).
- Abdul Ghafoor Mangi, Advocate Supreme Court and Miss Wajahat Niaz, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents (in C.Ps. Nos.1051-K, 1053-K and 1055-K of 2002).
- Manzoor Ali Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Miss Wajahat Niaz, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents (in C.Ps. Nos.1056-K and 1057-K of 2002).
- Nemo for Respondents (in C.Ps. Nos.1058-K and 1072 of 2002).
- Although Mr. Mazhar Alin Chohan, learned Advocate-on-Record for petitioner is in attendance Mr. Muhammad Siddiq Mirza, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner has submitted identical applications for adjournment on the ground that on account of his engagement before the Principal Seat of this Court at Islamabad, he is unable to appear.
- 2. Messrs Abdul Ghafoor Mangi, and Manzoor Ali Khan, learned Advocates Supreme Court have entered appearance on caveat on behalf of respondents in C.Ps. Nos.1051-K, 1053-K and 1055-K of 2002 and C.Ps. Nos.1056-K and 1057-K of 2002 respectively while in C.Ps. Nos.1052-K and 1054-K of 2002 respondents are present in person.
Headnotes / Summary
R. 4(1)(b)(iv)
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212(3)
Implementation of order of reinstatement
Services of the respondents were terminated by Authority, but said order was struck down by the Service Tribunal and respondents were ordered to be reinstated in service, order of reinstatement however, was not implemented
Authority was required to implement the judgment of the Service Tribunal in its true spirit as no irreparable loss was likely to be caused to the Authority by reinstatement of respondents
Direction was given by the Supreme Court to comply with judgment of the Service Tribunal within specified period. Respondents in person (in C.Ps. Nos.1052-K and 1054-K of 2002).
Judgment & Decree
Although Mr. Mazhar Alin Chohan, learned Advocate-on-Record for petitioner is in attendance Mr. Muhammad Siddiq Mirza, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner has submitted identical applications for adjournment on the ground that on account of his engagement before the Principal Seat of this Court at Islamabad, he is unable to appear.
2. Messrs Abdul Ghafoor Mangi, and Manzoor Ali Khan, learned Advocates Supreme Court have entered appearance on caveat on behalf of respondents in C.Ps. Nos.1051-K, 1053-K and 1055-K of 2002 and C.Ps. Nos.1056-K and 1057-K of 2002 respectively while in C.Ps. Nos.1052-K and 1054-K of 2002 respondents are present in person.
3. Respondents have a genuine grievance that the petitioner-WAPDA after illegal termination of the employment of the respondents, struck down by the Federal Service Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) vide judgment, dated 10-9-2002, has not bothered to implement the reinstatement orders. Before proceeding further with the hearing of the petitions, authorities of. the petitioner-WAPDA are required to implement the judgment of the Tribunal in its true spirit, as no irreparable loss is likely to be caused to the Management by reinstatement of such employees. Compliance within two weeks under intimation to the Registrar of this Court. Hearing of the petitions is adjourned as prayed. H.B.T./W-8/SC Order accordingly.