Pakistan Case Law
1998 PLC (C.S.) 891

AMJAD RAZA KHAN and another vs GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB through Secretary, Local Government and Rural Development Department, Lahore and 4 others

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1998 PLC (C.S.) 891
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No, 236 of 1995 Writ Petition No, 12481/94
Date1995-06-05
Judge(s)Sajjad Ali Shah, C. J., Zia Mahmood Mirza and Sh. Riaz Ahmad
Authored bySajjad Ali Shah
ResultCase remanded
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This petition for leave to appeal challenged a High Court order that suspended the transfer and posting orders of the petitioners as Executive Engineers in the Punjab Local Government and Rural Development Department. The core legal question was whether the High Court possessed jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition concerning terms and conditions of service, given the bar under Article 212 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973, which mandates the Service Tribunal as the exclusive forum for such disputes. Additionally, the petitioners challenged the propriety of the High Court granting interim relief that effectively granted the final relief sought in the pending writ petition. The Supreme Court did not definitively rule on the merits of the jurisdiction issue but held that the question of jurisdiction was of paramount importance and should have been decided by the High Court in the first instance. Consequently, the Supreme Court directed the High Court to prioritize and finally dispose of the main writ petition, including a specific finding on the question of jurisdiction, within two weeks.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does the High Court have jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition regarding terms and conditions of service in light of Article 212 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973?
  • Is it appropriate for a High Court to grant interim relief that effectively constitutes the final relief sought in a pending writ petition?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Article 212, Constitution of Pakistan 1973
service matterjurisdiction of High CourtArticle 212Service Tribunalinterim reliefterms and conditions of servicetransfer and posting

ORDER

' SAJJAD ALI SHAH, C.J.---By this petition, leave is being sought to file appeal against order, dated 7- 5-1995 passed by the High Court in Writ Petition No, 12481 of 1994, whereby operation of orders dated 3-1-1994 and 10-1-1994 is suspended during the pendency of the writ petition.

2. Respondents 3 and 4 herein, namely, Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq and Zaheer-ud-Din, who are Executive Engineer and senior-most Assistant Engineer respectively in the Punjab Local Government and Rural Development Department, challenged orders dated 3-1-1994 and 10-1-1994 in the writ petition mentioned above in the High Court, whereby petitioners herein, namely, Amjad Raza Khan and Rai Muhammad Umer have been transferred and posted as Executive Engineers in Local Government and Rural Development Department. This writ petition was filed on 3-10-1994 and vide impugned order dated 7-5-1994 the said writ petition is admitted to regular hearing and operation of the orders impugned therein, as mentioned above, is suspended.

3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners herein, who are respondents 3 and 4 in the writ petition, firstly that High Court has no jurisdiction to entertain writ petition for the reason that impugned orders touched upon the terms and conditions of service in respect of which jurisdiction of the High Court is barred under Article 212 of the Constitution as competent forum before which such question can be agitated is Service Tribunal. Secondly, by granting interim relief, High Court has granted relief in totality which is not permissible under the law as the main petition is still pending. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents 3 and 4 herein has defended the order passed by the High Court and impugned in this petition on the ground that High Court is competent to pass such order, which is fair and valid in the circumstances of this case.

3-A. It appears that in the High Court comments were filed by the Government of Punjab in which objection is raised with regard to the jurisdiction of the High Court and also to the effect that writ petitioners had not availed departmental remedy, hence resort to the Court was premature. Plea is also raised that appointments of respondents Nos. 3 and 4 in the writ petition have been made by transfer and not by deputation. In such circumstances, question of jurisdiction is of paramount importance and the High Court should have decided this question in the first instance. It also appears from the record that the writ petition was filed on 3-10-1994 and stay order was passed on 7-5-1995 which is after about seven months. In such circumstances, we are of the view that the High Court should decide the question of jurisdiction and since stay has been granted, it would be proper and in the fitness of the things that High Court should dispose of the main petition finally including finding on the question of jurisdiction within two weeks from today. Order accordingly.

Petition stands disposed of in the terms mentioned above.

Cited by 1 case

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