Syed NAZIR GILLANI vs PAKISTAN RED CRESCENT SOCIETY and another

ORDER

' TASSADUQ HUSSAIN JILLANI, C.J.---Seeks review of this Court's judgment dated 1-6-2005 vide which Civil Appeal No,1080 of 1998 filed by the Pakistan Red Crescent Society was allowed and the judgment of the learned Lahore High Court dated 19-3-1997 was set aside inter alia on the ground that the Constitution petition filed by the respondent under Article 199 of the Constitution challenging his removal from service was not maintainable as he was governed by non-statutory rules.

2. Learned counsel for the review petitioner submits that the judgment under review cannot be sustained because it is violative of the law laid down by this Court in Pakistan Defence Officer's Housing Authority v. Lt. Col Syed Jawaid Ahmed (2013 SCM R 1707) and he in particular referred to para 50(i) & (iv) to contend that if an organization violates its own rules, the writ would be competent. He further added that the service rules framed by the Pakistan Red Crescent Society are statutory as they wee framed under section 5 of the Pakistan Red Crescent Society Act. In support of the submissions made, learned counsel relied on Civil Aviation Authority through Director General v. Javed Ahmed (2009 SCM R 956).

3. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, defended the impugned judgment as according to him the judgments to which learned counsel has made a reference are relatable to employees who were removed under the Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000 and that this Court has specifically adverted to this aspect in the judgment reported at Abdul Wahab v. HBL (2013 SCM R 1383).

4. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner at some length, we find that it has now been well settled that the Rules framed by the Pakistan Red Crescent Society are non-statutory and on that count the writ petition was not maintainable. This Court has dilated on this aspect at length in Pakistan Defence Officer's Housing Authority v. Lt. Col. Syed Jawaid Ahmed (2013 SCM R 1707) wherein in para 50(ii) it has specially been held as follows:-- "Where conditions of service of employees of a statutory body are not regulated by.

Rules/Regulations framed under the Statute but only Rules or Instructions issued for its internal use, any violation thereof cannot normally be enforced through writ jurisdiction and they would be governed by the principle of 'Master and Servant'."

5. For what has been discussed above, we do not find any error apparent in the face of record to warrant interference. The petition having no merit is accordingly dismissed.