SIRAJ UL HAQ vs ABDUR RASHID And Another
This matter came before the Supreme Court of Pakistan as a petition for leave to appeal against an order passed by the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad. The core legal question was whether the Federal Service Tribunal correctly determined that the posting order of the petitioner, Siraj-ul-Haq, as Assistant Director (Directory) by the Director-General, T & T, Islamabad, was violative of the applicable service rules. The Supreme Court, after hearing the petitioner's counsel, upheld the decision of the Federal Service Tribunal. The Court held that the Tribunal's finding, which declared the petitioner's posting order to be contrary to the rules, illegal, and inoperative, was based on a correct interpretation of the relevant service regulations. Consequently, the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the Tribunal's judgment, effectively affirming the direction that the respondent's case be considered and decided on its merits. The judgment reinforces the principle that administrative appointments must strictly adhere to established service rules and that findings of fact by a specialized tribunal regarding such compliance are generally not subject to interference if based on a correct reading of the law.
- Did the Federal Service Tribunal err in declaring the petitioner's posting order illegal and inoperative?
- Is a finding by the Service Tribunal regarding the violation of service rules subject to interference by the Supreme Court if based on a correct reading of those rules?
ORDER
1. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.--According to the office report this petition is barred by 19 days. However, for the reasons given in the application for condonation of delay, the delay is condoned and the petition taken up on the_ merits.
2. The petitioner herein (Siraj-ul-Haq) has questioned the order of the Federal Service Tribunal Islamabad dated 10-4-1984, whereby it found the order of the Director-General, T & T, Islamabed dated 10-1-1982 posting the petitioner herein (Siraj-ul-Haq) as Assistant Director (Director) under the General Manager, Islamabad Telecommunica--tion Region, Islamabad to be contrary to the rules, illegal and inoperative and issued a direction that the case of Abdur Rashid (respondent No.!
3. Herein) be considered and decided on merit.
4. We have heard Mr. Sadiq Warraich, learned counsel for the A petitioner, at some length and are of the opinion that the finding of the Service Tribunal that the order dated 10-1-1982 posting Siraj-ul- HaG as Director (Directory) was violative of the rules is based on a correct reading of the relevant rules. This case, therefore, is not a fit one for. Interference.