Pakistan Case Law
1986 SCMR 1534

Kh. ABDUL WAHID And Another vs CHAIRMAN, WAPDA And Another

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1986 SCMR 1534
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petitions Nos. 120-R & 121-R of 1986 Petitions Nos. 64 & 64-A of 1986
Date1986-06-29
Judge(s)Nasim Hasan Shah and Mian Burhanuddin Khan
Authored byNasim Hasan Shah
ResultPetitions dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter arose from two petitions for leave to appeal directed against an interlocutory order of the Federal Service Tribunal rejecting the petitioners' applications to add additional grounds alleging mala fides following a remand by the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The Service Tribunal had rejected the applications on the basis that the issue had already been considered by the Supreme Court in an earlier round of litigation. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether an appeal or petition for leave to appeal lies against an interlocutory order of the Service Tribunal, and whether a plea of mala fides can be considered by the Tribunal on remand. The Supreme Court held that the petitions were incompetent as they were directed against an interlocutory order. However, the Court clarified its intent, laying down the principle that if a party can demonstrate that action against them was actuated by mala fides, the Service Tribunal is not debarred from taking note of such allegations upon remand. Both petitions were accordingly dismissed with observations.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Is a petition for leave to appeal maintainable against an interlocutory order passed by a Service Tribunal?
  • Is a Service Tribunal debarred from considering allegations of mala fides on remand if supported by evidence?
interlocutory orderleave to appealremandmala fidesService Tribunalmaintainability

ORDER

1. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.--This order will dispose of Civil Petition 120-R of 1986 and Civil Petition No. 121-R of 1986.

2. This Court, on 14-12-1985 had accepted the appeals preferred by WAPDA (Civil Appeals Nos. 331 of 1985 and 332 of 1985) against the decision of the Service Tribunal, dated 15-12-1984 passed in favour of the petitioners herein and remanded their cases for decision afresh.

3. On remand, both the petitioners submitted applications before the Service Tribunal for permission to add additional grounds to substantiate the mala fides of WAPDA etc. (respondents herein) against them. These applications were rejected on the ground that this question had already been considered by this Court while deciding their cases in the earlier round, vide order, dated 27-3- 1986. These petitions for leave to appeal are directed against the aforesaid order.

4. These petitions are obviously incompetent as they are directed against an interlocutory order passed by the Service Tribunal.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners, however, submitted that In the interest of justice this Court may clarify further its true intent while disposing of Civil Appeals Nos. 331 of 1985 and 332 of in its consolidated judgment passed on 14-12-1985, in regard to this question.

6. We would observe that if the petitioners are able to show that the action against them was indeed actuated by mala fides, the Tribunal` would not be debarred from taking note of this.

7. With these observations, both the petitions are dismissed.

Cited by 16 cases

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