Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: HAIDER ABBAS VS Respondent: FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN
1997 P L C (C
1997 P L C (C.S.) 114
[Karachi High Court]
Before Ali Muhammad Baloch and Abdul Latif U. Qureshi, JJ
HAIDER ABBAS
versus
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Establishment, Islamabad and 2 others
Constitutional Petition No. 1045 of 1995, decided on 29th Januarys 1996.
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑
‑‑‑‑Arts. 199 & 212‑‑‑Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), s. 3 & 4‑‑ Constitutional petition‑‑‑Maintainability‑‑‑Petitioner/civil servant in his Constitutional petition had challenged order passed by respondent‑Authority whereby it was found that on basis of seniority list of civil servants, prepared by Authority, petitioner had lost his seniority and had been relegated to a lower position and thus was rendered ineligible for the post of Accountant's‑‑Petitioner filed Constitutional petition only after five days of making his representation before Authority concerned and without waiting for result of such representation‑‑‑Order challenged in Constitutional petition was order of reversion of petitioner which order related to terms and conditions of services, remedy, thus lay under S: 4 of Service Tribunals Act, 1973 and not before High Court by way of Constitutional petition‑‑‑Constitutional petition was dismissed being not maintainable.
Mohibullah v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1975 Lah. 813 ref.
Fazlur Rehman Rana for Petitioner.
Farooq H. Naek, Dy. A.‑G. for Respondents,
Date of hearing: 23rd April, 1995.
ORDER
ALI MUHAMMAD BALOCH, J.‑‑‑After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel, we have come to the conclusion that the petitioner is not satisfied with the order dated 12‑3‑1995, by which it was held that on the basis of the seniority list of Senior Auditors prepared on 15‑11‑1994 the petitioner had lost his seniority and had been relegated to a lower position and therefore, was rendered ineligible for the post of Accountant. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that after making a representation to the Auditor‑General on 24‑5‑1995 he has filed the present petition challenging the abovesaid order. The Constitutional petition was filed on 29‑5‑1995 i.e. only after ‑5 days of making his representation. Learned Dy. A.‑G. has referred to sections 3 and 4 of the Service Tribunals Act, whereby the jurisdiction to challenge the impugned order exclusively lies with the Services Tribunal and has also referred to Article 212 of the Constitution according to which Article 199 is not applicable in the present case. Reliance has been placed on a case of Mohibullah v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1975 Lah. 813. Mr. Fazlur Rehman Rana, learned counsel for the petitioner, however, tried to make out a case before us that the question of fitness was involved in this case and, therefore, the present petition was maintainable. We find that the case of Mohibullah v. Federation of Pakistan has decided the question which arises in the present case. The order impugned is nothing but an order of reversion and it relates to the terms and conditions of the service and, therefore, the remedy lies under section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act and consequently, we do not find that the present position is maintainable before this Court under Article 199. We, therefore, dismiss this petition in limine. However, since the petitioner has made a representation before the Departmental Authorities, it ought to be decided by them. The learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that so far it has not been decided. It will be proper for the authorities to decide the representation made by the petition and at the same time, if the petitioner feels appropriate, he can approach the Service Tribunal as well as in the law.
A.A./H‑15/K Petition dismissed.