Pakistan Case Law
1998 SCMR 1948

Syed MAZHAR HUSSAIN BUKHARI vs SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1998 SCMR 1948
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Appeals Nos. 1012 and 1448 of 1995
Date1998-06-17
Judge(s)Nasir Aslam Zahid, Munawar Ahmad Mirza and Abdur Rehman Khan
Authored byNasir Aslam Zahid
ResultAppeals dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter concerns two civil appeals challenging orders of the Lahore High Court, which dismissed writ petitions filed by civil servants regarding their transfer orders. The core legal question was whether a constitutional petition under Article 199 of the Constitution is maintainable by a civil servant challenging service-related matters, specifically transfers, or if such matters fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Service Tribunal under Article 212 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court dismissed both appeals, affirming the High Court's decisions. The Court held that Article 212 of the Constitution creates an absolute bar against the filing of a constitutional petition under Article 199 by a civil servant in relation to any matter connected with the terms and conditions of service, provided the Service Tribunal has jurisdiction. The Court further clarified that this constitutional bar applies even in cases where the impugned order is alleged to be mala fide, as such allegations must also be adjudicated by the Service Tribunal rather than the High Court.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Is a writ petition under Article 199 of the Constitution maintainable by a civil servant regarding terms and conditions of service?
  • Does the bar under Article 212 of the Constitution apply to service-related orders alleged to be mala fide?
  • Does the Service Tribunal have exclusive jurisdiction over transfer orders of civil servants?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Article 212 of the Constitution
  • Article 199 of the Constitution
service matterconstitutional petitionjurisdiction of service tribunaltransfer ordermala fidemaintainabilitycivil servant

' NASIR ASLAM ZAHID, J.---This judgment will dispose of Civil Appeal No, 1012 of 1995 filed by Syed Mazhar Hussain Bukhari and Civil Appeal No,1448 of 1995 filed by Dr. Mrs. Zahida Iftikhar. Except for Mr. Zainul Abdin, learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Mr. Tanvir Ahmed, learned Advocate-on-Record for respondent No,3 in Civil Appeal No,1012 of 1995 no one is present on behalf of any other party. We have heard Mr. Zainul Abdin, learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court. We have also perused the relevant record.

2. Civil Appeal No,.1012 of 1995 is directed against the order of the Lahore High Court dated 15-6- 1995 dismissing his writ petition. Appellant is an employee of Zila Council, Lodhran, and he has challenged his transfer from one place of posting to another place. His Writ Petition No,5249 of 1994 was dismissed in limine by order dated 15-6-1995 of the Lahore High Court on the ground that it was not maintainable as the transfer order having been passed in relation to the terms and conditions of service it was appealable before the Service Tribunal. It was held that the writ petition was barred under Article 212 of the Constitution.

' Civil Appeal No,1448 of 1995 filed by Dr. Mrs. Zahida Iftikhar is directed against the order dated 17- 4-1994 passed by a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court dismissing her Intra-Court Appeal No,208 of 1994. It was held that her writ petition was barred under Article 212 of the Constitution as rightly held by the learned Single Judge.

3. We find no infirmity in the impugned orders in both the appeals. Even those orders challenged on the ground of mala fide, are appealable before the Service Tribunal and Article 212 of the Constitution is a bar against filing of a Constitutional Petition before the High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution. In a recent decision passed on 27-5-1998 dismissing Civil Petition No,727-L of 1998 (Khalid Mahmood Wattoo v. Government of Punjab), this Court (a Bench of 3 Judges) examined this question in some detail and referred to a number of judgments of this Court and also of the High Court and dismissed the petition filed by petitioner Khalid Mahmood Wattoo on the ground that it was a bar under Article 212 of the Constitution. It was reiterate as follows:-- "The consistent view of the this Court has been that a writ petition or Constitutional petition under Article 199 of the Constitution is not maintainable by a civil servant in relation to any matter connected with the terms and conditions of service in respect whereof the Service Tribunal has jurisdiction, in view of the provisions contained in Article 212 of the Constitution."

It was further held in the said decision that even in cases where the order is bar is mala fide, the bar of Article 212 of the Constitution is attracted.

4. As a result, Civil Appeal No,1012 of 1995 filed by Syed Mazhar Hussain Bukhari and Civil' Appeal No,1448 of 1995 filed by Dr. Mrs. Zahida lftikhar are dismissed. The interim orders passed in these appeals stand recalled.

Cited by 20 cases

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