Pakistan Case Law
2005 PLC (C.S.) 1447

NADEEM AHMED vs PAKISTAN STATE OIL COMPANY LTD. and another

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2005 PLC (C.S.) 1447
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.C.P. No.418-K of 2000
Date2001-01-10
Judge(s)Irshad Hasan Khan, C.J. Muhammad Arif and Qazi Muhammad Farooq
ResultPetition dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This petition for leave to appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan arose from an order of the Federal Service Tribunal regarding the termination of the petitioner's contractual employment. The core legal question was whether the petitioner's services could be validly terminated without assigning any reason pursuant to the terms of his contract of employment. The Supreme Court observed that the petitioner was appointed on a contract basis and that no statutory rules or regulations existed to govern the terms and conditions of such contract service. Furthermore, the appointment letter explicitly stipulated that the service could be terminated without assigning any reason upon giving one month's written notice. Holding that the matter was purely of an individual nature and did not involve any substantial question of law of public importance, the Supreme Court declined leave to appeal under Article 212(3) of the Constitution and dismissed the petition.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can a contractual employee's service be terminated without assigning any reason if the appointment letter expressly contains such a condition?
  • Does a individual service dispute regarding contractual termination involve a substantial question of law of public importance under Article 212(3) of the Constitution?
  • Whether leave to appeal under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 can be granted in the absence of statutory rules regulating contract service terms?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Article 212(3), Constitution of Pakistan 1973
contract employmenttermination of servicetermination without reasonleave to appealsubstantial question of lawpublic importanceFederal Service Tribunal

ORDER

' The sole grievance of the petitioner is whether his service could be terminated without assigning any reason.

2. We have heard Khawaja Naveed Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner and Raja Haq Nawaz, learned counsel for the respondents/ caveators.

3. The Federal Service Tribunal has recorded a finding of fact that the appointment of the petitioner was on contract basis. It is also conceded by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no statutory rules/regulations exist to regulate the terms and conditions of contract service.. In the appointment letter of the petitioner it is expressly provided that his service can be terminated without assigning any reason whatsoever with one month's written notice and the petitioner was also given the option to resign from service by giving the company one month's written notice.

4. Beflt . As it may, the question raised herein is of individual th% nature. We are not satisfied that a substantial question of law of public importance within the contemplation of Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, is involved warranting interference.

' Resultantly, the petition is dismissed and leave declined.

Cited by 12 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.