Al Wakeelo logo

Al Wakeelo

Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty

Initializing Secure Chambers

1995 SCMR 915

Sheikh MUHAMMAD ASGHAR vs The CHAIRMAN, WAPDA, LAHORE and 5

Petitioner: Sheikh MUHAMMAD ASGHAR VS Respondent: The CHAIRMAN, WAPDA, LAHORE and 5 others

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan Decision Date: 1994-05-08

Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Saleem Akhter, Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry Title:Sheikh MUHAMMAD ASGHAR vs The CHAIRMAN, WAPDA, LAHORE and 5

others Case No.: Civil Petition No, 392-L of 1993 Date of Judgment:1994-05-08 Reported As: 1995 SCMR 915 Result: Leave refused Judgment ORDER ' SALEEM AKHTAR, J.---The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment passed by the Federal Service Tribunal whereby his appeal was dismissed. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Cashier on 29-5-1986. On 1-6-1989 he was appointed Revenue Officer on one year's probation period. On 15-5-1991 his services were dispensed with immediate effect. The petitioner challenged this order in a Constitution Petition and it seems that the parties compromised. WAPDA offered the petitioner to join as a Cashier and to withdraw the petition. The petition was accordingly withdrawn and the petitioner continued his service as a Cashier. The petitioner seems to have agitated the question again challenging the termination of service on the ground that the termination was not in accordance with the terms and conditions of appointment as he had completed the period of probation and clause 2(ii) of the letter of appointment could not be invoked. The learned Members of the Tribunal dismissed the appeal in limine. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the order of termination was illegal and the respondents had no authority to pass such an order. The petitioner had challenged the order in the Constitution Petition and agreed to join as a Cashier and to withdraw his petition. Now having acted upon the said arrangement, he cannot challenge the order of termination. The petition has no merit and is dismissed.

Related Legal Research & Directories