Qazi M. ASIF JAH BAHADUR vs GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB through Education Secretary, Lahore and 3 others
This intra-court appeal challenged the dismissal of a writ petition filed by a civil servant against ongoing departmental proceedings. The appellant invoked Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, arguing that the High Court's jurisdiction was not barred because no final order had been passed in the departmental proceedings, thereby precluding the Service Tribunal's jurisdiction. The core legal question was whether the High Court retains writ jurisdiction under Article 199 over departmental proceedings against a civil servant when no final order has been issued, despite the exclusionary provisions of Article 212 of the Constitution. The Court held that the appeal was meritless, affirming the dismissal of the writ petition. Relying on the non-obstante nature of Article 212, the Court ruled that the jurisdiction of the High Court is excluded in matters relating to the terms and conditions of service of civil servants, regardless of whether a final order has been passed. The principle laid down is that Article 212 operates as a complete bar to the High Court's jurisdiction under Article 199 in service matters, precluding judicial review of interlocutory departmental proceedings.
- Does the High Court have jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution to interfere in departmental proceedings against a civil servant before a final order is passed?
- Does Article 212 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973 bar the High Court's jurisdiction in service matters even when no final order has been issued by the departmental authority?
- Article 199, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
- Article 212, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
' The appellant, admittedly a civil servant had assailed the departmental proceedings initiated against him, through a writ petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 which stands dismissed vide impugned order dated 23-9-2003 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court due to bar of jurisdiction contained in Article 212 of the Constitution, In assailing the same, it is contended by the learned counsel that the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution is not barred in all the matters and that since no final order has been passed in the case the bar of jurisdiction contained in Article .212 is not attracted to the circumstances of this case. It is further contended that the appellant is entitled to be dealt with in accordance with law. Reliance has been placed upon Al-Ahram Builders (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Income Tax Appellant Tribunal (1993 SCMR 29), I.A. Sherwani v. Government of Pakistan through Secretary Finance Division, Islamabad (1991 SCMR 1041), Hafiz Sabir Ali v. Administrator Municipal Corporation, Sahiwal (2002 PLC (C.S.) 1024), Khalid Mahmud Ch. v. Government of the Punjab through Secretary Livestock and Dairy Development, 2002 SCMR 805 and Muhammad Azhar v. General Manager (Operation) Power WAPDA (PLD 1990 Lahore 352).
2. We have considered the contentions of the learned counsel but are unable to subscribe the same inasmuch as in view of non-obstante operation of Article 212 the bar of jurisdiction gets attracted. In Muhammad Aslam Bajwa v. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 1974 Lahore 545) it was observed that the exclusionary provisions of Article 212 of the Constitution were applicable "notwithstanding anything hereinbefore contained" which takes within its ambit the preceding provisions of the Constitution.
3. So far as the contention of the learned counsel that no final order has since been passed, therefore, petition before this Court is competent as the matter cannot be taken to the Service Tribunal is concerned, the contention is equally untenable in view of the legal position stated in Abdul Wahab v. Government of Punjab (PLD 1989 SC 508), The Superintendent of Police, Headquarter, Lahore v. Muhammad Latif (PLD 1988 SC 387) and Akhtar Ali v. Province of Punjab (PLD 1992 Lahore 127). The precedents cited by the learned counsel are of no help to the appellant. In this view of the matter, we find that jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution stood' excluded by operation of Article 212 of the Constitution. The petition has, therefore, rightly been dismissed by the learned Single Judge.
4. As a result of the above, we do not find any justification to interfere with the impugned order. The appeal is dismissed accordingly.
Cited by 4 cases
- Abdus Salam vs Assistant Commissioner, Murree & 5 others 2023 LHC 1019, 2024 PLC (C.S.) 1
- ALI IFTIKHAR JAFRI and 12 others vs I.-G. POLICE, PUNJAB and 336 others 2005 PLC (C.S.) 811
- Professor Dr. AFTAB AHMED MALIK vs UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY, LAHORE through its Registrar and 2 others 2005 PLJ Lahore 527
- Dr. AFTAB AHMAD MALIK Versus UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY 2005 PLC(CS) 97