1997 SCMR 170 (PLP)
RAFIQUE AHMAD CHAUDHRY‑‑‑Appellant Versus AHMAD NAWAZ MALIK and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1997 SCMR 170 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian and Fazal Ilahi Khan, J |
| Parties | RAFIQUE AHMAD CHAUDHRY‑‑‑Appellant Versus AHMAD NAWAZ MALIK and others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Punjab Civil Servants Act (VIII of 1974)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997 SCMR 170 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Civil Servants Act (VIII of 1974)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1997 SCMR 170 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Ajmal Mian and Fazal Ilahi Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1997 SCMR 170 (PLP) (RAFIQUE AHMAD CHAUDHRY‑‑‑Appellant Versus AHMAD NAWAZ MALIK and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Hanif Niazi, Advocate Supreme Court and Rana Maqbool Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 21st October, 1996.
- 2. In support of the above petition, it has been urged by Mr. Muhammad Hanif Niazi, learned Advocate Supreme Court that prima facie the aforementioned writ petition was not competent before the High Court in view of Article 212 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, and that even if the High Court had admitted the writ petition, it was not a fit case for suspending the transfer order of the petitioner. In support of his above submission, Mr. Niazi has relied upon an unreported order of this Court dated 24‑4‑1996 in the case of Ayyaz Anjum v. Government of Punjab, Housing and Physical Planning Department through its Secretary and others 1997 SCMR 169 besides on the case of Munshi Muhammad Azam v. A.C. and others 1996 PLC (C.S.) 415.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order dated 16‑9‑1996 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Writ Petition No. 16418 of 1996). ‑‑‑‑S. 9‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts. 199, 212 & 185(3)‑‑‑Civil servant‑‑‑Transfer‑‑‑Competerfecy of Constitutional petitions against transfer order of civil servant‑‑‑Bar of jurisdiction of High Court‑‑‑Suspension of transfer order of High Court‑‑‑Legality‑‑‑High Court suspending transfer order of civil servant while admitting his Constitutional petition against his transfer‑‑ Validity‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted to consider whether High Court was justified in suspending transfer order in Constitutional petition‑‑‑Impugned order of High Court was, however, suspended till disposal of appeal. Ayyaz Anjum v. Government of Punjab, Housing and Physical Planning Department through its Secretary and others Civil Petition for Leave 1232‑L of 1996 and Munshi Muhammad Azam v. A.C. and 5 ref.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑S. 9‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts. 199, 212 & 185(3)‑‑‑Civil servant‑‑‑Transfer‑‑‑Competerfecy of Constitutional petitions against transfer order of civil servant‑‑‑Bar of jurisdiction of High Court‑‑‑Suspension of transfer order of High Court‑‑‑Legality‑‑‑High Court suspending transfer order of civil servant while admitting his Constitutional petition against his transfer‑‑ Validity‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted to consider whether High Court was justified in suspending transfer order in Constitutional petition‑‑‑Impugned order of High Court was, however, suspended till disposal of appeal. Ayyaz Anjum v. Government of Punjab, Housing and Physical Planning Department through its Secretary and others Civil Petition for Leave 1232‑L of 1996 and Munshi Muhammad Azam v. A.C. and 5 ref. Muhammad Hanif Niazi, Advocate Supreme Court and Rana Maqbool Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 21st October, 1996. AJMAL MIAN, J.‑‑This is a petition for leave to appeal against the order dated 16‑9‑1996 of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court passed in Writ Petition No. 16418 of 1996 suspending the transfer order of the petitioner while admitting the aforesaid writ petition of respondent No.
1. The petitioner has, therefore, filed the present petition for leave to appeal.
2. In support of the above petition, it has been urged by Mr. Muhammad Hanif Niazi, learned Advocate Supreme Court that prima facie the aforementioned writ petition was not competent before the High Court in view of Article 212 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, and that even if the High Court had admitted the writ petition, it was not a fit case for suspending the transfer order of the petitioner. In support of his above submission, Mr. Niazi has relied upon an unreported order of this Court dated 24‑4‑1996 in the case of Ayyaz Anjum v. Government of Punjab, Housing and Physical Planning Department through its Secretary and others 1997 SCMR 169 besides on the case of Munshi Muhammad Azam v. A.C. and others 1996 PLC (C.S.) 415.
3. We are inclined to grant leave to consider the question, whether the High Court was justified in suspending the transfer order in a writ petition. Leave is, accordingly, granted. The impugned order is suspended till the disposal of the appeal arising out of the above petition which should be listed for regular hearing at an early date. A.A./R‑288/S Leave granted.