Intra-court appeal. The International Islamic University terminated the employees. 2024 S C M R 472.
 |
| intra-court appeal. The International Islamic University. 2024 S C M R 472 |
اگر کسی قانون میں اپیل، نظرثانی یا ریویو کا حق موجود ہو، تو انٹرا کورٹ اپیل قابلِ سماعت نہیں ہوتی۔
عدالت اور بینچ
مقدمہ کا پس منظر
بنیادی قانونی سوال
Law Reforms Ordinance 1972 کی دفعہ 3(2) کا اطلاق
ہائی کورٹ کے فیصلے کی توثیق
حتمی نتیجہ
جی، اس کیس کو پوائنٹس میں یوں بیان کیا جا سکتا ہے:
Must read judgement
2024 S C M R 472
[Supreme Court of Pakistan]
Present: Yahya Afridi, Ayesha A. Malik and Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, JJ
INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY, ISLAMABAD through Rector and another---Petitioners
Versus
Syed NAVEED ALTAF and others---Respondents
Civil Petition No.835 of 2021, decided on 16th November, 2023.
(Against judgment dated 18.01.2021 passed by the Islamabad High Court, Islamabad in I.C.A. No. 1100 of 2013)
(a) International Islamic University Ordinance (XXX of 1985)---
----S. 38---Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972), S. 3(2), proviso---Decision of the Board of Governors---Intra Court Appeal---Maintainability---Section 38 of the International Islamic University Ordinance, 1985 ('Ordinance of 1985') provides for the remedy of appeal or review before the Board of Governors against any order punishing a teacher or other employees of the university---Original order in the present case was an order by the Board of Governors discontinuing incentives which order was first challenged by the respondents by way of a departmental appeal and then subsequently in a writ petition---Respondents admittedly availed the remedy of appeal provided against the original order by the Board of Governors in terms of section 38 of the Ordinance of 1985----Consequently, the proviso to section 3(2) of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 created a bar on the remedy of appeal for the petitioners (University)---As there was a remedy of appeal available under the Ordinance of 1985, hence the impugned judgment of the High Court was correct in dismissing the Intra Court Appeal---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and leave was refused.
Mst. Karim Bibi and others v. Hussain Bakhsh and another PLD 1984 SC 344 applicable.
Muhammad Abdullah v. Deputy Settlement Commissioner, Centre-I, Lahore PLD 1985 SC 107 ref.
(b) Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972)---
----S. 3(2), proviso---Intra Court Appeal (ICA)---Maintainability---Proviso to section 3(2) of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972---Scope---Essential requirement to invoke the proviso to section 3(2) of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 is to see whether the remedy of at least one appeal, review or revision is available under the law against the original order, in the proceedings in which the law is applicable to decide the ICA on merit---Law must prescribe for the remedy of appeal, review or revision, and if so section 3(2) of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 will be applicable, notwithstanding whether that remedy is available to the person filing the ICA.
Muhammad Abdullah v. Deputy Settlement Commissioner, Centre-I, Lahore PLD 1985 SC 107 ref.
Rehan-ud-Din Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners.
Muhammad Munir Paracha, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent