SAMI UDDIN vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Aviation Ss

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

SAMI UDDIN VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Aviation Ss. 3(6) & 4(4)---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 199 (1) (a)(ii) & 199(5)---Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---Employee of Pakistan International Airline Corporation Limited (PIACL)---Claim for release of pensionary benefits---Respondent-Corporation raised objections as to maintainability of the constitutional petition as its employees were not governed by statutory rules and also contended that the petitioner worked four years beyond his superannuation date receiving excess salary and benefits due to wrong entry of his date of birth---Validity---Pakistan International Airline Corporation Limited (PIACL) is a public sector company created under the Pakistan International Airlines Corporation (Conversion) Act, 2016 (Act)---Federal Government makes appointment and plays a pivotal role in its policy making---It being a statutory body performs some of the functions of the Federation/State and through the exercise of public power, it creates public employment---Though PIACL has no statutory service rules yet, its employees are "persons in corporation services" within the scope of S. 3(6) of the Act, thus, PIACL is a "person" within the meanings of Art.199 (1) (a)(ii) read with Art. 199 (5) of the Constitution---If the actions or order passed by a statutory body were violative of the statute creating it and/or Rules/Regulations framed under the Statute, the same could be interfered with by the High Court under Art. 199 of the Constitution---Since the petitioner had sought enforcement of his right and privileges as to his pensionary benefits, the constitutional petition was maintainable---Date of birth of an employee recorded in his service book/record was the date to determine his age for attaining the superannuation---Petitioner served PIACL for considerable period of 40 years, however, PIACL never raised any objection regarding his actual date of birth during his entire period of service and after his retirement such objection had been raised making a claim of recovery on account of petitioner working beyond his actual superannuation date, whereas it was an admitted position that even for the said period the petitioner served PIACL---Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances.

SAMI UDDIN vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Aviation Ss — 2025 PLC(CS) 837 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLC