1970 SCMR 61

MUHAMMAD SHARIF MALIK vs THE CHAIRMAN, THAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, BHAKKAR AND Other

Share on WhatsApp ⭐ Prefer in Google

Citation1970 SCMR 61

CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan

Case No.Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 335 of 1967 Writ Petition No.

Date1967-10-25

Judge(s)A. R. Cornelius, C. J. and S. A. Rahman

Authored byCornelius C.

ResultLeave granted

AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan upon a petition for Special Leave to Appeal against the High Court's refusal to issue a writ challenging the termination of the petitioner's service by the Chairman of the Thal Development Authority, a statutory body. The core legal question concerns the propriety and validity of the termination order and the correct interpretation of the instruments governing the Authority's actions. The Supreme Court observed that the instruments in question had received conflicting interpretations by different Division Benches of the High Court, with leave to appeal already granted in related matters. Holding that an authoritative interpretation by the apex court is necessary to resolve this judicial conflict, the Court granted leave to appeal. The key principle laid down is that where divergent High Court interpretations arise regarding statutory instruments governing service termination, the Supreme Court will grant leave to settle the authoritative construction.

Questions settled in this judgment

Whether leave to appeal should be granted when conflicting interpretations of statutory instruments arise among Division Benches of the High Court?
What is the proper interpretation of the instruments governing the termination of service by the Thal Development Authority?

Special Leave to Appealservice terminationstatutory bodyconflicting interpretationsThal Development Authority

ORDER

1. CORNELIUS C. J.-This petition, seeking Special Leave to Appeal against refusal of a writ by the High Court, raises a question concerning the propriety and validity of the termination of the petitioner's service by order of the Chairman of the Thal Development Authority, a statutory body.

2. Mr. M. Ibrahim Khan points out that the particular instru--ments under which the action of the Authority was taken have been the subject of interpretation by another Division Bench of the High Court, against whose decision leave to appeal has been granted by this Court on the 10th October 1967, in Civil Petitions Nos. 331 and 332 of 1967. The other Division Bench has acted on an interpretation which is contrary to that reached in the present case.

3. It is desirable that this Court should give an authoritative interpretation of these instruments, in view of the conflict which has arisen. We accordingly grant leave to appeal as prayed. Security Rs.

4. 1,000.