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

Malik SHAH JAHAN vs GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA Ss — 2023 PLC(CS) 236 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Citation
2023 PLC(CS) 236 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
Court
Peshawar High Court
Year
2023
Reporter
PLC
Parties
Malik SHAH JAHAN vs GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 4; Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Service Tribunals Act

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

Malik SHAH JAHAN VS GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA Ss.4 & 5---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 199 & 212---Constitutional petition---Terms and conditions of service---Restoration in service---Acquittal from criminal charge---Petitioner was removed from service in year 2013, for his involvement in two criminal cases---After acquittal from one criminal case in year 2015 and in other case in year 2019, petitioner sought his reinstatement in year 2021---Validity---Non-obstante clause of Arts. 212(1) & (2) of the Constitution began with 'not withstanding anything hereinbefore contained', which had overriding on Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court under Art.199 of the Constitution which was already 'subject to the Constitution'---Scope of jurisdiction and powers of Service Tribunal were provided in Ss. 4 & 5 of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Service Tribunals Act, 1974---High Court did not have any jurisdiction to entertain any proceedings in respect of terms and conditions of service of a civil servant, which could be adjudicated by Service Tribunal under Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Service Tribunals Act, 1974---Any transgression to exclusion contained under Art. 212 of the Constitution, would render order of High Court void and illegal---Unless jurisdiction of Service Tribunal was ousted under S.4(1) (b) of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Service Tribunals Act, 1974, assumption of jurisdiction by High Court in respect of matters of terms and conditions of civil servant was unconstitutional and impermissible--- Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances. Vigilantibus non dormientius aequitas subvenit: Equity aids vigilant and not the one who sleeps over his rights---Maxim refers to unreasonable delay enforcing a legal claim--- Sleeping over his rights is such a right which is no longer available as it is barred by laches.

Other judgments reported in 2023 PLC

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