1989SCMR860 (PLP)
Mian SHAFIUDDIN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR and 4 others — Petitioners Versus SURAT KHAN MARRI, DIRECTOR and 41 others — Respondents
| Citation | 1989SCMR860 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Usman Ali Shah, JJ |
| Parties | Mian SHAFIUDDIN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR and 4 others — Petitioners Versus SURAT KHAN MARRI, DIRECTOR and 41 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989SCMR860 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989SCMR860 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Usman Ali Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989SCMR860 (PLP) (Mian SHAFIUDDIN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR and 4 others — Petitioners Versus SURAT KHAN MARRI, DIRECTOR and 41 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Bashir Ahmad Ansari, Advocate instructed by Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Tahir Muhammad Khan instructed by Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on Record for Respondent No.l.
- Date of hearing: 16th January, 1989.
- Bashir Ahmad Ansari, Advocate instructed by Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Tahir Muhammad Khan instructed by Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate‑on Record for Respondent No.l.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order dated 20th September, 1988 passed by the learned Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, in Appeal No.104 (Q) of 1984).
Art.212(3)--Leave to appeal was granted to examine whether appeal before Service Tribunal, in circumstances of case, was badly time-barred and on that account, no relief should have been allowed--Apart from question of limitation two general questions of law of public importance, which had also been raised would need consideration viz. whether Government has power to regularise an ad hoc appointment with retrospective effect from the date of original induction of civil servant as ad hoc appointee, and if not, whether without such power being available to Government, Service Tribunal can exercise such power or jurisdiction.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought by the petitioners, against the acceptance by the Central Service Tribunal, of the service appeal filed by Surat Khan Marri, respondent. After hearing both the learned counsel we consider it a fit case to examine; whether, the appeal before the Service Tribunal, in the circumstances of this case, was badly time‑barred and on that account no relief should have been allowed. Apart from the question of limitation in this case, two other general questions of law of public importance have been raised; whether, the Government has the power to regularise an ad hoc appointment with retrospective effect from the date of original induction of the civil servant as ad hoc appointee, and if not; whether, without this power being available to the Government, the Service Tribunal can exercise such power or jurisdiction. These and other questions would need consideration. We accordingly grant leave to appeal. Stay to continue. The appeal shall be prepared on the present record with direction for filing of all additional necessary documents. It shall be heard together with all similar other matters involving the question of regularisation of ad hoc appointments with retrospective effect, at an early date. A.A./S‑247/S Leave to appeal granted.