Pakistan Case Law← Search
1995 SCMR 46

YAR MUHAMMAD vs WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY through

Citation1995 SCMR 46
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No, 1033-L of 1992
Date1994-03-28
Judge(s)Muhammad Rafique Tarar, Manzoor Hussain Sial, Saad Saood Jan
ResultLeave refused

ORDER

1. ' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--This is the second time that this petition for special leave to appeal has come up for consideration. The question that now requires determination has been formulated by Sajjad Ali Shah, J. It reads as follows: "Contention is that the' Managing Director and Authority are not competent to amend Rule -12 of the said Rules as such power is beyond the scope of section 18 of the West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act XXXI of 195$ and section 29 thereof envisages framing of regulations and not rules by the Authority with the approval of the Government."

2. ' The provisions having a bearing on the question are sections 18 and 29, Water and Power Development Authority Act, 1958. Section 18 reads as follows: "The Authority shall prescribe the procedure for appointment, and terms and conditions of service of its officers and servants, and shall be competent to take disciplinary action against its officers and servants."

3. Section 29, ibid, is in the following terms: "For the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions of this Act, the Authority may with the approval of the Government, frame such Regulations as it may consider necessary or expedient."

4. It will be noticed that section 29, ibid, is of a general nature while section 18, ibid, deals specifically with the terms and conditions of service of the employees of the Authority. As the rules regulating the disciplinary proceedings are concerned, they relate to the terms and conditions of service of the employees of the Authority and as such it is the Authority which is competent to make or amend them under section 18, ibid. Thus, the amendment by the Authority in rule 12 of the Pakistan WAPDA Employees (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1978 cannot be assailed on the ground of competency. The petition is therefore dismissed.

Cited by 2 cases

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