Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD IQBAL KHAN and 2 others VS Respondent: DEPUTY DIRECTOR, FOOD, GUJRANWALA and 9 another
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Ghulam Mujaddid Mirza, Saad Saood Jan Title:MUHAMMAD IQBAL KHAN and 2 others vs DEPUTY DIRECTOR, FOOD,
GUJRANWALA and 9 another Case No.: Civil Petitions Nos. 731, 741 and 992 of 1988 Date of Judgment:1989-03-15 Reported As: 1989 SCMR 1777 Result: Leave granted Judgment ORDER ' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--These are three petitions for special leave to appeal from the order dated 25-5-88 of the Punjab Service Tribunal.The petitioners were Foodgrain Supervisors/Inspectors and were incharge of wheat stock at Nowshera Virkan Centre. A Martial Law Inspection Team conducted a raid on the centre on 21-10-83 and found huge shortage in the wheat stocks. Consequent upon this discovery, a criminal case was registered against the petitioners. Departmental proceedings were also taken against them. Consequent upon these proceedings, not only their services were terminated but they were also asked to make up the loss suffered by the Government. The petitioners filed departmental appeals. These were not decided within 90 days whereupon they filed appeals before the Punjab Service Tribunal. The appeals were admitted to regular hearing. During the pendency of the appeals, the departmental appeals were disposed of.The petitioners did not file separate appeals against the orders made by the appellate authority but prayed that they should also be permitted to challenge the said orders in the appeals already pending in the trial Court. The Learned Tribunal not only rejected this prayer but also dismissed the appeals on the ground that with the dismissal of the departmental appeals, the appeals already pending before the Tribunal had become infructuous.The petitioners seek leave to appeal from the orders of the Tribunal. 2. In support of these petitions it is contended that the view taken by the learned Tribunal is in conflict with the decision of this Court in S.A Mukarim v. Government of Sind (1988 SC MR 826). The contention raised needs examination. Leave to appeal is granted. Security for costs in the sum of
---
## Page 2
Rs,1,000 in each petition. The appeal may he made ready for hearing on the present record with permission to the parties to file additional documents, if any.