KHALILULLAH KAKAR vs PROVINCIAL POLICE OFFICER, BALOCHISTAN R — 2021 PLC(CS) 1030 SUPREME-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

KHALILULLAH KAKAR VS PROVINCIAL POLICE OFFICER, BALOCHISTAN R.2(b)---Balochistan Police Act (X of 2011), S.3---Balochistan Police Force---Separate seniority lists prepared for Deputy Superintendents of Police ('DSPs') belonging to different branches---Legality---Respondents who were DSPs belonging to the legal/prosecution branch challenged the issuance of separate seniority lists---Held, that as matter of common practice, which was prevalent in all four Provinces and Islamabad Capital Territory, seniority lists of DSPs of legal/prosecution branch was being prepared separately as compared to DSPs of other branches---Rule 2(b) of the Balochistan Deputy Superintendents of Police Service Rules, 1978, mentioned about different branches of the Police---Said Rules of 1978, the Balochistan Police Act, 2011 and the Police Rules, 1934, were silent on the point as to whether there should be separate or joint seniority lists of DSPs but the language used therein about the different branches of the police force and the fact that the mode of recruitment, nature of job, duties and training of legal/prosecution branch of the Balochistan Police was different than the other branches of the police, left no room to believe that the act of issuing separate seniority lists was well reasoned, in line with the practice followed in other Provinces including Islamabad Capital Territory and Gilgit Baltistan and in accordance with the intent of the law---Appeal was allowed. Citation Name: 2021 PLC(CS) 1030 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case KHALILULLAH KAKAR VS PROVINCIAL POLICE OFFICER, BALOCHISTAN arts. 199 & 212(3)---Balochistan Service Tribunals act (V of 1974), S. 3(2)---Issue of joint seniority list of Deputy Superintendents of Police ('DSPs')---Matter relating to the terms and conditions of service---Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---article 212(2) of the Constitution specifically placed an embargo on all other courts except Service Tribunal to grant an injunction, make any order or 'entertain' any proceedings in respect of any matter relating to the terms and conditions of service even if they were mala fide, ultra vires or coram non judice---Word 'entertain' used in art. 212(2) of the Constitution was of significant importance; it meant that any petition or proceeding relating to the terms and conditions of service should not even be entertained by the High Court in its constitutional jurisdiction under art. 199 of the Constitution---Respondents being employees of Provincial Police Force were civil servants and the matter pertaining to issuance of joint seniority lists specifically related to their terms and conditions of service, which particularly rested within the jurisdiction of Provincial Service Tribunal---Filing of the Constitutional petitions before the High Court, at a time when the Provincial Service Tribunal was functional, was against the Constitutional mandate---Constitutional petitions filed by the respondents were not maintainable before the High Court---appeal was allowed. Citation Name: 2021 PLC(CS) 1030 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case KHALILULLAH KAKAR VS PROVINCIAL POLICE OFFICER, BALOCHISTAN art.199---Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---Constitutional jurisdiction (of the High Court) was extraordinary in its scope, it had to be exercised sparingly---Jurisdiction conferred on the High Courts under art. 199 of the Constitution was an extraordinary relief and the same had to be exercised in aid of justice and not to interfere in jurisdictions of other statutory forums---When the law has provided an adequate remedy, constitutional jurisdiction under art. 199 of the Constitution could not be exercised as the same had to be exercised in exceptional circumstances, which could justify invoking the said jurisdiction---Tendency to bypass remedy provided under relevant statute by resorting to constitutional jurisdiction (of the High Court) was to be discouraged so that legislative intent was not defeated---Such jurisdiction was meant to be exercised in extraordinary circumstances and not in run of the mill cases.

KHALILULLAH KAKAR vs PROVINCIAL POLICE OFFICER, BALOCHISTAN R — 2021 PLC(CS) 1030 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2021 PLC