Pakistan Case Law← Search
1974 SCMR 137

M. B. KHALFAY vs CHAIRMAN, WEST PAKISTAN RAILWAY BOARD, LAHORE AND

Citation1974 SCMR 137
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 122 of 1973
Date1974-10-01
Judge(s)Salahuddin Ahmad, Waheeduddin Ahmad
ResultPetition dismissed

ORDER

1. WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD, J.-The petitioner's services were terminated on the 19th August 1953 under the orders of the Director-General, Railways. The petitioner challenged the validity of this order in the civil Court. The suit was decreed and the operative portion of the decree is as under:- "The purported removal of the plaintiff from service with the defendants by notice dated 19th August 1953, is void and inoperative and that he remains in service with the defendants."

2. The respondents filed appeal against this order and the judgment and decree of the trial Court was reversed in appeal by the Division Bench of the former High Court of West Pakistan Karachi Bench. The petitioner challenged this judgment before this Court in Civil Appeal No. K-44 of 1964 and the appeal of the petitioner was accepted by judgment dated the 22nd February 1965. The trial Court decree was restored. The relevant paragraph dealing with the restoration is as under:- "For the reasons stated above we set aside the judgment and decree of the High Court and restore that of the trial Court. The appellant will be entitled to his costs in all the Courts."

3. Mr. Fazle Mahmood, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2, has relied on a decision of this Court in Muhammad Abu Zafar v. Secretary to Government of West Pakistan Agriculture Department and others (1969SCMR298). It was held in that case that the High Court while accepting writ petition had not issued mandamus of an absolute nature as regards arrears of salary and hence no action for contempt of Court was called for. In our opinion also; the proper remedy for the petitioner is to approach the civil Court for the redress of his grievance. No order was made by this Court or by the trial Court for the payment of the salary or for the fixation of the seniority. The only order made was that the petitioner shall be deemed in service throughout. This order has been complied with by the respondents and the petitioner has been re-instate. There is no merit in the petition. 'i he petition is dismissed.

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