PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

Citation Name: 2023 PLC(CS) 1131 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case YOUSAF ALI vs CHIEF EXECUTIVE, WATER AND SANITATION SERVICES, PESHAWAR appointment — 2023 PLC(CS) 1131 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Citation
2023 PLC(CS) 1131 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
Court
Peshawar High Court
Year
2023
Reporter
PLC
Parties
Citation Name: 2023 PLC(CS) 1131 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case YOUSAF ALI vs CHIEF EXECUTIVE, WATER AND SANITATION SERVICES, PESHAWAR appointment
Subject matter
Constitutional

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

Judgment text as reported

Citation Name: 2023 PLC(CS) 1131 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case YOUSAF ALI VS CHIEF EXECUTIVE, WATER AND SANITATION SERVICES, PESHAWAR appointment---Discrimination---Scope---authority of Selection Committee cannot be challenged and questioned because of the fact it is the best judge at the given time to form an opinion and take decision after judging the ability of candidates---Court cannot enter into the domain of appointing authority or selection to judge the potential of a candidate nor can substitute its own opinion with that of Interview Committee particularly, when no mala fide is apparent. Citation Name: 2023 PLC(CS) 1131 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case YOUSAF ALI VS CHIEF EXECUTIVE, WATER AND SANITATION SERVICES, PESHAWAR appointment---Discrimination---Factual controversy---Scope---Department invited applications for the post---after conclusion of recruiting process, the petitioner was held to secure 70 marks and his name was recorded at serial No. 4 of the merit list---Respondent was declared successful for the post as he had obtained higher marks than the petitioner---Two other individuals who had secured more marks than the petitioner were not arrayed as party to the petition---Said candidates were necessary party to the petition---Grievance of petitioner was that he was awarded lesser marks in the interview in order to accommodate other candidate; however, as per comments of the department available on file, respondent had 10 years' experience in the relevant field, therefore, he was awarded experience marks for the same---No law or any right of the petitioner was violated by the respondents---allegation levelled by the petitioner was general and vague qua mala fide against the department, which was not sufficient for intervening in the selection process---Matter pertained to factual controversy which could not be resolved in constitutional jurisdiction---No illegality or irregularity was committed by the department by issuing the appointment order---Constitutional petition was dismissed.

Other judgments reported in 2023 PLC

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English