Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: IFTIKHAR AHMED RANDHAWA and others VS Respondent: Mian MUHAMMAD TUFAIL and 2 others
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Muhammad Bashir Jehangiri, Khalil-Ur-Rehman Khan, Sh. Ijaz Nisar Title:IFTIKHAR AHMED RANDHAWA and others vs Mian MUHAMMAD TUFAIL and 2
others Case No.:Civil Petitions for Leave to Appeal Nos. 857 and 1361-L of 1997 Appeal No, 567 of 1996 C.P. No,857 of 1997 C.P. No, 1361-L of 1997 Date of Judgment:1998-03-03 Reported As: 1998 PLC (C.S.) 822 Result: Leave granted Judgment ORDER ' KHALIL-UR-REHMAN KHAN, J.---This order will dispose of two petitions for Leave to Appeal Nos. 857 of 1997 and 1361-L of 1997 as both are directed against one judgment. 2. The appeal filed by Mian Muhammad Tufail respondent No,1 was accepted by the learned Punjab Service Tribunal and he (Muhammad Tufail) was declared to be entitled to be considered for promotion to the post of Electric Inspector w,e,f, 25-3-1989 and consequently the departmental authorities were directed to process and place the case of Mian Muhammad Tufail respondent No,1 before the relevant committee within a period of two months. 3. The aforesaid declaration and direction was issued as the petitioners in C.P.L.A.No,1361-L of 1997 the Provincial Government/Department in its comments had admitted that a vacancy of Electric Inspector became available on 25-3-1989 and the Tribunal was of the view that under the West Pakistan Electric Inspectors and Assistant Electric Inspectors Recruitment Rules, 1963 he could not have been considered ineligible had he (respondent No,1 herein) been considered for promotion in 1989. 4. Sh. Altaf Ilahi, learned Additional Advocate-General submitted that the vacancy of Electric Inspector became available on 24-10-1989 and not with effect from 25-3-1989 and on the said date Iftikhar Ahmed Randhawa had become eligible having served as Assistant Electric Inspector for five years, his date of appointment being 25-6-1984, while Mian Muhammad Tufail was not eligible as his date of promotion to the post of Assistant Electric Inspector is 12-8-1985 and that in any case Mian Muhammad Tufail respondent No,1 was ineligible under Rule 5(4) of the Rules as
---
## Page 2
amended vide notification dated 29-11-1969. This notification amending rule 5(4) of the Rules was not brought to the notice of the Tribunal. It was also pointed out that Mian Muhammad Tufail respondent No,1 had invoked Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court for seeking the same relief as granted by the Service Tribunal by filing Constitutional Petition No,1176 of 1995 but the said writ petition was dismissed in limine. The order so passed by the High Court was also not brought to the notice of the Service Tribunal. It was contended that no relief could legally be granted by the Service Tribunal in the appeal as Iftikhar Ahmed Randhawa who was promoted as Electric Inspector was not impleaded as a respondent in the service appeal filed by the respondent No, 1. 5. The points raised require consideration. Leave to appeal is granted to examine the a fore noted contentions. 6. Order suspending operation of the impugned judgment shall continue.