MUNAWAR HUSSAIN TOORI vs GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION CABINET SECRETARIAT, ISLAMABAD R — 2025 PLC(CS) 129 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation: 2025 PLC(CS) 129 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court: Lahore High Court
Year: 2025
Reporter: PLC
Parties: MUNAWAR HUSSAIN TOORI vs GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION CABINET SECRETARIAT, ISLAMABAD R
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

MUNAWAR HUSSAIN TOORI VS GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION CABINET SECRETARIAT, ISLAMABAD R.5---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.25---Appointment of Members of National Industrial Relations Commission (NIRC)---Perks and privileges/payment and allowance---Equality---Reasonable classification---Intelligible defferentia---Scope---Legitimate expectancy---Contention of the petitioner was that he was not treated on the analogy of other similarly placed members of the NIRC and District and Sessions Judges in other Provinces for grant of perks and privileges/pay and allowances---Validity---Petitioner had legitimate expectancy to receive the same perks and privileges as were being granted to similarly placed persons/colleagues---All admissible allowances to regular judicial officers in same grade would be admissible to the petitioner as the petitioner was appointed against the judicial post having requisite qualification and practice as an advocate and as such, he could not have been discriminated for the perks and privileges being paid to other appointees/Members of NIRC, who were retired District and Sessions Judges---Petitioner was being treated differently as compared to his colleagues, which was absolutely unwarranted under the quality clause contained in Art.25 of the Constitution---No reasonable distinction existed between the petitioner and other similarly placed Members and there was no justified reason to isolate the case of the petitioner from the other similarly placed members because the discrimination against the petitioner was not based on any rational ground or reasonable classification rather it tantamount to creating artificial grouping---Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLC

2025 PLC(CS) 1593 SUPREME-COURTPROVINCE OF SINDH VS AMANULLAH 'Mutatis mutandis'---Connotation---Expression mutatis mutandis generally applies for making certain adjustmen…
2025 PLC(CS) 1663 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSHEHROZE RAHEEM MUGHAL VS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION R. 11---Identical cases, entertaining of---Scope ---Petitioner, while relying on R. 11 o…
2025 PLC(CS) 606 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRGHAZANFAR ALI VS VICE-CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR Principle---adequate alternate remedy----Under common law, remedy of…
2025 PLC(CS) 1663 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSHEHROZE RAHEEM MUGHAL VS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Conduct of the party invoking writ jurisdiction of High Court---Scope and effect ---Peti…
2025 PLC(CS) 1663 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSHEHROZE RAHEEM MUGHAL VS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION administration of justice---Points ascertained at time of admission of case---Subsequent…
2025 PLC(CS) 1663 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSHEHROZE RAHEEM MUGHAL VS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Doctrine of laches---Indolence of aggrieved party---Effect---Petitioner filed the writ p…

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