TOWN COMMITTEE, SILLANWALI DISTRICT SARGODHA Through Its Chairman
This petition for special leave to appeal challenged a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which had declared the termination of the respondent's service to be of no legal effect. The petitioner, a Town Committee, sought to overturn this decision on two grounds: first, that the Selection Committee responsible for the respondent's appointment was improperly constituted; and second, that the respondent was over-age at the time of his appointment. The Supreme Court of Pakistan dismissed the petition, holding that the argument regarding the improper constitution of the Selection Committee could not be entertained as it was not raised before the High Court. Regarding the age issue, the Court observed that the Commissioner had validly relaxed the age limit for the respondent, and the petitioner did not dispute the Commissioner's competence to grant such relaxation. Consequently, the appointment could not be challenged on that basis. The Court affirmed that new pleas cannot be introduced for the first time in appellate proceedings and that valid administrative relaxations of service rules are binding on the appointing authority.
- Can a party raise a plea regarding the improper constitution of a selection committee for the first time before the Supreme Court if it was not raised in the High Court?
- Does an appointment remain valid if the age limit was relaxed by a competent authority?
ORDER
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--This is a petition for special leave to appeal from the judgment and order, dated 4-2-1987 of the Lahore High Court whereby the order of termination of service of respondent No. l was declared to be of no legal effect.
2. In support of this petition, it is stated that the High Court has not taken into account the following circumstances, namely;
(1) the Selection Committee which recommended the appointment of respondent No.1 was not properly constituted, and
(2) at the time of his appointment, respondent No.1 was over-age.
3. It is to be noticed that the plea with regard to improper constitution of the Selection Committee was not taken by the petitioner in the High Court. It cannot, therefore, be advanced for the first time in this Court. As regards the second circumstances, it is not denied that the Commissioner had relaxed the age limit in the case of respondent No.1. His competence in this regard is not disputed.
That being so, the appointment of respondent No.1 could not be called in question on this ground.
This petition is without any merit and is hereby dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.