MUHAMMAD TAYYAB BUKHARI vs Dr — 2022 SCMR 1913 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.

MUHAMMAD TAYYAB BUKHARI VS Dr. ANEES-UR-REHMAN R. 20---Punjab Civil Servants Act (VIII of 1974), S. 23---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 27(1), third proviso---Interpretation of Article 27(1) of the Constitution and the three provisos thereto---Notification issued under Rule 20 of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974, reserving a certain percentage of vacancies in respect of certain areas of the Province ('the impugned Notification')---Constitutionality---Article 27(1) of the Constitution commences by safeguarding against discrimination in the service of Pakistan but then proceeds to create certain exceptions; its first proviso permitted that for a period of forty years from the commencing day posts for persons belonging to any class or area may be reserved to secure their adequate representation in the service of Pakistan---Commencing day of the Constitution is 14 August 1973, therefore, forty years stood expired on 14 August 2013, making the first proviso inconsequential---Second proviso is not applicable, in the present case, as it is with regard to services which can only be provided by a member of a particular sex---Third proviso uses language similar to the language of the first proviso in that if there is under-representation of any class or area in the service of Pakistan 'it may be determined by an act of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)'---Admittedly, neither the Province concerned nor the Federation has legislated with regard thereto---In the present case, the Provincial Government, took it upon itself to insert Rule 20 in the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service), Rules, 1974 ('the Rules') and issued the impugned Notification by, wrongly, assuming that it could do so, and in doing did not act in accordance with the third proviso to Article 27(1) of the Constitution---Neither the Notification nor Rule 20 of the Rules accorded with the law or the Constitution. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1913 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD TAYYAB BUKHARI VS Dr. ANEES-UR-REHMAN art. 189---Binding precedent of the Supreme Court---Scope---To constitute a binding precedent the Supreme Court should have decided a question of law or it's decision be based upon or enunciates a principle of law. Head NotesCase Description

MUHAMMAD TAYYAB BUKHARI vs Dr — 2022 SCMR 1913 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 SCMR