| Case ID |
2e66e9d4-22bf-49c7-9375-3b817934b3e2 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.610-L of 199 |
| Decision Date |
Jul 09, 1998 |
| Hearing Date |
Jul 09, 1998 |
| Decision |
The Supreme Court of Pakistan dismissed the petition for leave to appeal, thereby upholding the decision of the Federal Service Tribunal, Lahore. The Tribunal's order, which favored the petitioner, was found to be free from any legal infirmity. The Court highlighted that there was no question of a law of public importance that necessitated interference under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, and leave to appeal was refused. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.610-L of 1997, the Supreme Court of Pakistan delivered a pivotal judgment on July 9, 1998, addressing crucial aspects of administrative law and the application of the Service Tribunals Act, LXX of 1973. The petition, filed by the Government of Pakistan through the Collectorate of Customs, challenged the decision of the Federal Service Tribunal, Lahore, which had initially denied promotion to the respondent, Amar Mehmood, based on examination scores. The core of the dispute revolved around the interpretation of Section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act, which stipulates the requirements for promotion within the Customs Department. The respondent had secured 50% marks in three examination papers but fell short with 42 marks in the fourth. The Tribunal ruled in his favor by citing the department's precedent of granting grace marks to other candidates, thus ensuring consistency in treatment. However, the Supreme Court meticulously examined whether this decision aligned with the statutory framework and constitutional mandates. Under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, the Court scrutinized whether the case presented a matter of public importance warranting oversight. After a thorough analysis of the legal arguments presented by both the petitioners and respondents, the Court concluded that the Tribunal's decision was legally sound and did not exhibit any infirmities that would necessitate interference. The absence of a significant legal question of public interest further reinforced the Court's stance to dismiss the petition. This judgment underscores the judiciary's role in upholding the principles of legality and consistency in administrative decisions, especially within the framework of public service appointments and promotions. Legal practitioners, including advocates like Izharul Haque and Tanvir Ahmed, played a pivotal role in articulating the complexities of the case, ensuring that the arguments were presented with clarity and adherence to legal standards. The decision not only affirmed the authority of the Federal Service Tribunal but also emphasized the importance of adhering to established legal provisions without unwarranted deviations. As a result, the Supreme Court's affirmation provided a clear directive on the application of grace marks and the interpretation of statutory requirements in public service examinations. This case serves as a precedent for future litigations involving administrative decisions and the discretionary powers vested in service tribunals, highlighting the delicate balance between departmental policies and legal mandates. For students and professionals in the legal field, this judgment offers valuable insights into the intricacies of constitutional law, administrative justice, and the procedural aspects of appellate petitions in Pakistan's judicial system. Additionally, the involvement of high-profile judges like Irshad Hasan Khan and Ch. Muhammad Arif, JJ, underscores the case's significance and the judicial rigor applied in delivering the verdict. The comprehensive analysis presented in the judgment is a testament to the Supreme Court's commitment to ensuring fairness, equity, and the rule of law in administrative matters. Furthermore, the case has implications for ongoing debates on merit-based promotions and the extent of judicial intervention in administrative decisions, making it a critical reference point for policymakers and legal scholars alike. By upholding the Tribunal's decision, the Supreme Court reinforced the importance of consistency and fairness in public service examinations, ensuring that similar cases are adjudicated with the same level of diligence and adherence to legal principles. The judgment also highlights the procedural aspects of seeking leave to appeal, demarcating the boundaries within which the Supreme Court exercises its appellate jurisdiction. Overall, Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.610-L of 1997 is a cornerstone case that elucidates the interplay between statutory provisions, judicial interpretation, and administrative discretion, offering a comprehensive framework for understanding and navigating the complexities of public service law in Pakistan. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
Government of Pakistan,
Customs Department,
Federal Service Tribunal, Lahore,
Collectorate of Customs
|
| Judges |
IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, J.,
CH. MUHAMMAD ARIF, J.J
|
| Lawyers |
Izharul Haque, Advocate Supreme Court,
Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate on Record,
Nemo for Respondent
|
| Petitioners |
GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Collectorate of Customs and another
|
| Respondents |
AMAR MEHMOOD
|
| Citations |
1999 SLD 1130,
1999 PLC 1574
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Service Tribunals Act, LXX of 1973,
Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
|
| Sections |
4,
Art. 212 (3)
|