Pakistan Case Law
1991 SCMR 1874

Rai MUHAMMAD BASHIR vs THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOOD, GUJRANWALA

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1991 SCMR 1874
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No.787 of 1987
Date1990-01-23
Judge(s)Saad Saood Jan and Rustam S. Sidhwa
Authored bySaad Saood Jan
ResultLeave refused
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

The petitioner, an Assistant Food Controller, challenged his retirement from service, which was ordered by the Deputy Director under Section 12(ii) of the Punjab Civil Servants Act 1974. Following the dismissal of his review petition by the Deputy Director, the petitioner appealed to the Federal Service Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal on the grounds that the petitioner had failed to exhaust the mandatory departmental appeal process available to him under Section 21(1) of the Punjab Civil Servants Act 1974. The petitioner sought leave to appeal against this decision before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, affirming that a civil servant must exhaust all departmental remedies before approaching the Service Tribunal. Citing the precedent established in Ali Raza Shah Naqvi v. Government of Sindh, the Court held that the failure to file a departmental appeal rendered the petition before the Tribunal premature and incompetent. Consequently, the Supreme Court refused to grant leave to appeal, confirming that statutory procedures for departmental redress must be strictly followed.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can a civil servant approach the Federal Service Tribunal without first exhausting the departmental appeal process?
  • Is a review petition a valid substitute for a statutory departmental appeal under the Punjab Civil Servants Act 1974?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 12(ii), Punjab Civil Servants Act 1974
  • Section 21(1), Punjab Civil Servants Act 1974
civil servicecompulsory retirementdepartmental appealexhaustion of remediesservice tribunalleave to appeal

ORDER

SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.-The petitioner was serving as Assistant Food Controller, Gujranwala. By an order dated 5-11-1986, he was retired from service under section 12(ii), Punjab Civil Servants Act on completion of 25 years of service qualifying for pension and other retirement benefits. The order was passed by the Deputy Director. He had the right of appeal before the Director under section 21(1), the Punjab Civil Servants Act. Instead of exercising this right he preferred a review petition before the Deputy Director which was dismissed. He then filed an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal. The learned Tribunal dismissed the appeal on the ground that the petitioner had approached the Tribunal without exercising his right of departmental appeal. The petitioner seeks leave to appeal from this Court.

2. After hearing the learned counsel we are unable to find any infirmity in the view taken by the learned Tribunal; in fact it is in accord with the decision of this Court in the case of Ali Raza Shah Naqvi v. Government of Sindh (PLD 1979 SC 856). Leave is refused.

Cited by 2 cases

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