1997 PLP 1476 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD ASHAD AKHTAR‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ALI and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1997 PLP 1476 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Zia Mahmood Mirza, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASHAD AKHTAR‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ALI and others‑‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997 PLP 1476 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1997 PLP 1476 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Zia Mahmood Mirza, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1997 PLP 1476 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD ASHAD AKHTAR‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ALI and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Rao Shamim Ahmed, Director, Secondary Education, Multan Division, Multan for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑Arts. 199 & 212(3)‑‑‑Terms and conditions of service‑‑‑Jurisdiction of High Court‑‑‑Exclusion‑‑‑Extent‑‑‑Dispute raised by respondent allegedly related to terms and conditions of service which could have been agitated only before Service Tribunal, for jurisdiction of every other Court including High Court stood excluded in such matters by Art. 212 of the Constitution; that High Court had suspended order impugned before it without attending to question of its jurisdiction‑‑‑In view of assertions made by petitioners, operation of impugned interim stay order was suspended pending hearing of petition for leave to appeal‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted in circumstances. C.P. No. 1232‑L of 1996 ref.
Judgment & Decree
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑Arts. 199 & 212(3)‑‑‑Terms and conditions of service‑‑‑Jurisdiction of High Court‑‑‑Exclusion‑‑‑Extent‑‑‑Dispute raised by respondent allegedly related to terms and conditions of service which could have been agitated only before Service Tribunal, for jurisdiction of every other Court including High Court stood excluded in such matters by Art. 212 of the Constitution; that High Court had suspended order impugned before it without attending to question of its jurisdiction‑‑‑In view of assertions made by petitioners, operation of impugned interim stay order was suspended pending hearing of petition for leave to appeal‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted in circumstances. C.P. No. 1232‑L of 1996 ref. Ch. Muhammad Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Rao Shamim Ahmed, Director, Secondary Education, Multan Division, Multan for Respondent. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the Director, Secondary Education, Multan Division. Grievance made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the dispute raised by respondent No. l in his Constitutional petition related to the terms and conditions of his service which could be agitated only before the Service Tribunal as the jurisdiction of every other Court including the High Court stands excluded in such matters by Article 212 of the Constitution but the learned Judge in the High Court has suspended the order impugned before him without attending to the question of his jurisdiction. Reliance is placed on an order of this Court, dated 24th April, 1996 in Constitutional Petition No.1232‑L/1996. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel, operation of the impugned interim stay order is suspended pending the hearing of the petition for leave to appeal which may be fixed at an early date. A.A./M‑3270/S Leave granted