2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
MUHAMMAD GHOUS Versus FEDERAL PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION and others
| Citation | 2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Karamat Nazir Bhandari. J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD GHOUS Versus FEDERAL PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION and others |
| Primary Law | Federal Public Service Commission Ordinance (XLV of 1977) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Federal Public Service Commission Ordinance (XLV of 1977) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Karamat Nazir Bhandari. J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (MUHAMMAD GHOUS Versus FEDERAL PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Kh. Abrar Majal for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 10
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art, 199
Constitutional petition-Competitive examination
Relaxation of upper age of candidate-- Sealed packet containing result of, petitioner/Candidate of competitive examination of two years was opened in the Court in presence of ail parties which had shown that petitioner had failed in aggregate in both examinations and representative of Federal Public Service Commission had stated that said result would be communicated to the petitioner
Petitioner having failed to clear examinations, question whether petitioner was entitled to relaxation of upper age, had become immaterial. Sh. Anwar-ul-Haq,,Dy. A.-G. Qureshi Muhammad Nawaz Shah, Deputy Director, FPSC, Islamabad.
Judgment & Decree
Learned Deputy Attorney‑General has given a sealed packet containing result of the petitioner of Competitive Examination; 1994 and Competitive Examination, 1995. The packet has been opened in the open Court in presence of alb the parties. The perusal shows that the petitioner has failed in aggregate in both the examinations. The representative of the respondent‑Commission states that the result will now be communicated to the petitioner.
2. Since the petitioner has not been able to clear the examinations, the question whether he was entitled to relaxation of upper age has become immaterial. This petition is disposed of leaving the parties to bear their own costs.