Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: PUNJAB ROAD TRANSPORT BOARD VS Respondent: PUNJAB SERVICE TRIBUNAL LAHORE, ETC.Honorable Justice KARAM ELAHEE CHAUHAN
1981 P L C (C
1981 P L C (C. S.) 105
[Supreme Court]
Present: Karam Elahee Chauhan and Nasim Hasan Shah, JJ
PUNJAB ROAD TRANSPORT BOARD AND OTHERS
Versus
PUNJAB SERVICE TRIBUNAL LAHORE, ETC.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 527 of 1980, decided on 27th April, 1980.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Punjab Service Tribunal dated 13-3-1980 in Appeal No. 47/553 of 1980.
Civil Service---
----Service Tribunal, directing Road Transport Board to implement a certain Government older within one month and submit necessary report‑‑Contention that neither petitioner (Road Transport Board etc.) bound by Government order in question nor Service Tribunal possessed jurisdiction to issue sects a direction‑‑Held : Stage not yet ripe for filing petition before Supreme Court‑‑Petitioners if having any grievance ought to have first raised objection before Tribunal concerned so that Supreme Court could have benefit of views of Tribunal on subject.
Zia Mahmood Mirza, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate‑on‑record for Petitioners.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing : 27th April, 1980.
ORDER
KARAM ELAHEE CHAUHAN, J.‑This is a petition against an order dated 13‑3‑1980. whereby the Punjab Service Tribunal, has directed the petitioner namely, Punjab Road Transport Board etc. to implement the Government order mentioned therein within one month and submit the necessary report in that respect. The case has been fixed before the Tribunal, for 28‑4‑1980, to see the further progress in the matter. The case of the petitioners is that they were not bound by the Government order compliance whereof was sought to be secured by the Tribunal and nor the Tribunal even otherwise has any jurisdiction to issue a direction of the kind contained in the impugned order. In our opinion this is not a stage at which the petition of the present kind could have been filed in this Court. The petitioners have been directed t comply with certain order of the Government and if they had any objection to the same they should first raise it before the Tribunal so that we may have the benefit of the views of the Tribunal on the subject. The petition in these circumstances does not merit admission and being misconceived is dismissed accordingly.
Petition dismissed.