1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
MUHAMMAD SHAFI GUJAR Versus THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
| Citation | 1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Malik Muhammad Qayyum, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SHAFI GUJAR Versus THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act (XXXI of 1958) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act (XXXI of 1958) 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 Lahore High Court bench comprising: Malik Muhammad Qayyum, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (MUHAMMAD SHAFI GUJAR Versus THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nishat Ahmad Siddiqui for Petitioner.
- Muhammad Amin Bhatti for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 29th March, 1995.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 17-B
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Employee of Water and Power Development Authority was served with show-cause notice relating to allegations contained in charge-sheet against him
Petitioner had challenged show-cause notice through Constitutional petition against which respondent had objected that matter in question, being related to terms and conditions of service, was amenable to jurisdiction of Service Tribunal alone and High Court's jurisdiction in such matters was barred in terms of Art. 212 of the Constitution
Petitioner's status was that of civil servant in terms of S.17-B, West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act, 1958, Constitutional petition in terms of Art. 199 of the Constitution was not maintainable in circumstances. S.H.M. Rizvi and 5 others v. Maqsood Ahmad and others PLD 1981 SC 612 ref. Abdul Wahab Khan v. Government of the Punjab and 3 others PLD 1989 SC 508 rel.
Judgment & Decree
This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 arises out of service matter.
2. The petitioner is working as Upper Division Clerk in the employment of Water and Power Development Authority. It appears that certain complaints were made against him on the basis of which a charge-sheet was issued to him. His case is that the allegations contained in the charge-sheet were adjudicated upon by the learned Ombudsman and found to be incorrect but notwithstanding that the petitioner has been served with a show-cause notice on 23-1-1989. The validity of that notice has been challenged by the petitioner in this Constitutional petition on the ground that it is mala fide, unlawful, without jurisdiction and void.
3. A preliminary objection as to the jurisdiction has been raised by Mr. Muhammad Amir Bhatti, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent who has submitted that by section 17-B of the Water and Power Development Authority Act, 1958, the employees of the WAPDA are deemed to be civil servants for the purpose of Service Tribunals Act, 1973 and as such any dispute which is germane to the terms and conditions of their service can only be adjudicated by the Service Tribunal and not by this Court in view of Article 212 of the Constitution.
4. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner has while relying on S.H.M. Rizvi and 5 others v. Maqsood Ahmad and others (PLD 1981 SC 612) has maintained that as no final order has yet been passed against the petitioner, he cannot file an appeal before the Service Tribunal and, therefore, at this stage the petition filed before this Court is maintainable.
5. I regret my inability to agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner. Although it is correct that no final order has as yet been passed against the petitioner who has challenged the validity of a show-cause notice issued to him but the fact remains that the dispute raised by him relates to his terms and conditions of service and by virtue of section 17-B of the Water and Power Development Authority Act, 1958, the petitioner has status of civil servant and as such the dispute is amenable to the jurisdiction of Service Tribunal. It is unnecessary to enter into any further discussion in view of the pronouncement of the Supreme Court in Abdul Wahab Khan v. Government of the Punjab and 3 others (PLD 1989 SC 508) wherein it was observed that in cases where no final order had yet been passed the civil servant should wait till such order is passed and challenge the same before Service Tribunal. It was further held that the Constitutional petition even against interlocutory and intermediary orders would not be competent. In view of what has been stated above, this petition is dismissed as being not maintainable. No order as to costs. A.A./M-686/L ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.