MUHAMMAD AKHTAR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KHUSHAB Rr — 2026 CLC 834 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

MUHAMMAD AKHTAR VS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KHUSHAB Rr.17 & 18 --- Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Village Headman (Lumberdar)---Appointment---Allocation of marks---Petitioner / candidate securing highest marks---Subsequent call for fresh reports without recorded reasons---Re-evaluation---Legality---Appointment of low-scoring candidate (respondent), challenge to---Brief facts of the matter were that a vacancy for the post of village headman had arisen due to the death of the previous headman; the petitioner and respondents Nos. 3 and 4 applied, and the Tehsildar's report awarded the petitioner 95/100 marks, while respondents Nos. 3 and 4 secured 35/100 and 60/100 respectively; the authorities after seeking fresh reports reassessed the candidates and appointed respondent No.3 as 'village headman'; the petitioner challenged the appointment order before the High Court---Held: The conduct of the respondents clearly showed malafide; it was evident that the official respondents had acted on the basis of extraneous considerations, violated the Rules and failed to conduct themselves in a fair and transparent manner, therefore, the contention that further proceeding in the present case was in the nature of suo motu exercise of jurisdiction, was not only misconceived and ill-founded but also an attempt to defend inchoate, arbitrary and illegal actions of the respondents, being abeneficiary of the same---Even if the marks of farming were subtracted from the total tally of the petitioner, his total marks would have remained 90/100, which were far higher than the marks of runner up (respondent No.4) i.e. 60/100 marks---Judicial review of the impugned order and consequent appointment order, was well within the scope of exercise of power of judicial review of the High Court under Art.199 of the Constitution---Impugned order and subsequent appointment order were set aside---Present constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances.

MUHAMMAD AKHTAR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KHUSHAB Rr — 2026 CLC 834 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 CLC