Pakistan Case Law← Search
2005 SCMR 1263

MUHAMMAD ISHTIAQ and others vs PUNJAB SERVICE TRIBUNAL, LAHORE and others

Citation2005 SCMR 1263
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.P.L.As. Nos.1383, 1384, 1385, 1386, 1387, 1388, 1389, 1390, 1391, 1392, 1393 and
Date2003-03-10
Judge(s)Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday, Tanvir Ahmed
ResultPetition dismissed

ORDER

' KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY, J.-- This order shall dispose of C.P.L.As. Nos.1383, 1384, 1385, 1386, 1387, 1388, 1389, 1390, 1391, 1392, 1393 and 1394-L of 2002 which are directed against the same consolidated judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, dated 25-2-2002 through which 12 appeals filed by the petitioners before us, had been dismissed.

2. The petitioners in all these petitions were appointed to different posts in the Directorate of Agriculture (Crop Reporting Service), Punjab, Lahore, against leave vacancies. They continued to retain the said posts in the same capacity till the matter came to the notice of the Secretary, Agriculture and the Provincial Ombudsmen.

3. The continuance of these petitioners in service was thus, examined where after their services were terminated. Their departmental appeals were dismissed which led the petitioners to the Punjab Service Tribunal with their respective appeals which were dismissed through the above- mentioned judgment which is now impugned before us.

4. The Service Tribunal refused to come to the rescue of the petitioners for the reasons mentioned in para,6 of its judgment which is reproduced below for ready reference:-- "(6) The appellants were appointed against leave vacancies. Their services were liable to be terminated as soon as the officials who proceeded on leave reported back to duty but the appellants were adjusted against regular vacancies. The posts were never advertised. Sufficient numbers of applications were not received, no interviews of the appellants were taken by the Recruitment Committee and no merit list was prepared. The appellants were adjusted against regular vacancies without observing Procedure for recruitment and without merit. The adjustment orders being ab initio void cannot be sustained. I find no ground to interfere."

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners at some length and having considered all aspects of the matter, we find that no exception could be taken to the impugned judgment and further that these petitions did not disclose any question of law of public importance.

6. These petitions are, therefore, dismissed. Leave refused.

Cited by 1 case

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
Disclaimer·Privacy·Terms·Search