QAZI KHALID ALI vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice Government of Pakistan — 2026 SCMR 697 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Citation: 2026 SCMR 697 SUPREME-COURT
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
Year: 2026
Reporter: SCMR
Parties: QAZI KHALID ALI vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice Government of Pakistan
Subject matter: Service
Provisions referred to: S. 3; Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)

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

QAZI KHALID ALI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice Government of Pakistan. R.5---Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), S.3(4)---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.205---Tenure post of Chairman, Federal Service Tribunal (FST)---Grant of pensionary benefits---Scope. Claim of petitioner for pensionary benefits after completion of tenure of post of Chairman, Federal Service Tribunal for a term of three years was rejected on ground that terms/contract of appointment of certain length of service could not be construed as regular service for pensionary benefits. Validity. High Court, while rendering order, followed altogether different pathway to decline claim and also failed to consider impact and effect of Rule 5 of Federal Service Tribunal (Chairman and Members) Service Rules, 1983. Rule 5 could not be made inconsequential or redundant and unambiguously provided that if a person who was neither Judge nor retired Judge of High Court nor was or had been in service of Pakistan was appointed as Chairman, he shall be entitled to such salary, allowances and privileges as admissible to a Court. Notification of appointment also mentioned that petitioner, after assuming charge as Chairman, shall be entitled to such pay, allowances and privileges as admissible to a Judge of High Court. Rejection of representation or denial of pension claim was primarily based on tenure of petitioner as High Court Judge, however, Rules were not considered in their true spirit, particularly Rule 5. Case was remanded for de novo consideration on touchstone of Rule 5 to determine entitlement of petitioner or otherwise. Civil petition was converted into appeal and disposed of accordingly.

Other judgments reported in 2026 SCMR

2026 SCMR 1063 SUPREME-COURTMUHAMMAD IMRAN VS ISHFAQ AHMED. Ss. 12 & 39---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell---Agreement already cancelled by Court of c…
2026 SCMR 1056 SUPREME-COURTSALAMAT ALI VS State. S. 365-A---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Ss. 6 & 7(e)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 129(g)---Kidnapping…
2026 SCMR 36 SUPREME-COURTMUHAMMAD ASHRAF ANJUM VS SABIR HUSSAIN Ss. 12 & 22---Contract Act (IX of 1872), S. 55---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell--…
2026 SCMR 1045 SUPREME-COURTPROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Secretary Punjab Emergency Service Department, Lahore VS MUHAMMAD KHALIL. Art.260---Service of Pakistan---Meaning…
2026 SCMR 1045 SUPREME-COURTPROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Secretary Punjab Emergency Service Department, Lahore VS MUHAMMAD KHALIL. S.4(2) [as amended by Punjab Emergency…
2026 SCMR 966 SUPREME-COURTGHULAM ALI VS ALI SHER. Art.185(3)---Appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court---Concurrent findings---Interference. Concurrent findings canno…

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