2008 PLP 339 (CLC)

AKHTAR ZAMAN MALGHANI, J.

Following relief has been claimed in the instant constitutional petition:-- "It is, therefore, accordingly respectfully prayed that this Honourable Court may kindly be pleased to declare the dismissal order, dated 25-1-2007 as illegal, unlawful, without lawful authority and of no legal effect. Further the respondent may be directed to reinstate the petitioner into services with all back-benefits, in the interest of justice."

2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the petitioner was an employee of Habib Bank Limited, who was served with a show-cause notice as to why disciplinary action for alleged misconduct should not be taken against him, which was replied by the petitioner denying the 'allegations. It appears from the record that after conducting inquiry through Inquiry Committee, a second show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner on the basis of inquiry report and after receipt of reply and personal hearing, the petitioner was dismissed from services vide order, dated 25th January, 2007, hence this petition.

3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents. At the very outset, the learned counsel for the respondents raised objection about maintainability of the petition, as according to him, Habib Bank Limited after privatization has no concern with the affairs of Federation or a Province, which is condition precedent for maintainability of constitutional petition, as such; the petition was liable to be dismissed on such short ground.

4. In reply to such objection, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the bank was established under statute of Federation and petitioner was regular employee of bank, as such; petition was maintainable.

5. We have carefully considered the contentions put forth by the parties' learned counsel. It may be observed that under Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan, this Court if satisfied that no other adequate remedy is provided by law, on the application of an aggrieved person, can make an order directing a person performing within territorial jurisdiction of the Court functions in connection with the affairs of the Federation, a Province or a Local Authority to refrain from doing anything he is not permitted by law to do so or to do anything he is required by law to do so or declare that any act done or proceeding taken by a person performing functions in connection with the affairs of the Federation, a Province or a Local Authority has been done or taken without lawful authority and is of no legal effect. It is not disputed that after privatization of Habib Bank Limited, it is being run by a private party and bank has no concern with the affairs of Federation or a Province, which is condition precedent qua maintainability of constitutional petition. In this regard we are fortified by the judgments reported in PLD 1966 SC 445 and 2005 MLD 1798. In view of what has been discussed above, without going into merits of the case, in our considered view, the instant petition is not maintainable, which is dismissed accordingly. H.B.T./40/Q Petition dismissed.