 |
| Writ maintainability. |
متبادل قانونی چارہ جوئی موجود ہونے کی صورت میں رِٹ پٹیشن ناقابلِ سماعت | سپریم کورٹ AJ&K
کا اہم فیصلہ
2025 PLC (C.S.) 606
🧾 تعارف
📖 کیس کا پس منظر
⚖️ ہائی کورٹ کا فیصلہ
🏛️ سپریم کورٹ میں مؤقف
📚 قانونی اصول
🧠 نتیجہ
Must read Judgment.
2025 P L C (C.S.) 606
[Supreme Court (AJ&K)]
Before Raza Ali Khan, J
GHAZANFAR ALI
Versus
VICE-CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR and others
Civil PLA No.422 of 2024, decided on 1st October, 2024.
(For leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court dated 7-5-2024 in Writ Petition No.698 of 2023).
(a) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974)---
----Arts. 42 & 44---University of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Act (XXXIV of 1985 ), S. 38---Associate Professor at the University of Azad Jammu and Kashmir---Removal from service, challenging of---Right of appeal, non-availing of---Writ petition before the High Court---Maintainability---High Court dismissed the writ petition on the basis that the petitioner had the right to file an appeal before the Syndicate---Validity---In presence of any other efficacious remedy, discretionary relief under writ jurisdiction is not available to an aggrieved person---Law with respect to exercise of judicial review of public actions or inactions, in presence of alternative adequate remedy, is firmly settled---Although the decision-making powers of lower courts or other executive bodies are subject to judicial review of constitutional Courts, but it is essential to emphasize that judicial review should only be invoked as a residual jurisdiction in exceptional circumstances, which must be proven---This power should not be exercised sparingly where an adequate alternative legal remedy is available to an aggrieved person---Whenever an alternative statutory mechanism exists to redress the grievance of an aggrieved party, the Court will be reluctant to grant any relief---Alternative remedies may encompass various statutory mechanisms and when the public interest demands that power of judicial review should be exercised speedily, it is necessary to limit the number of cases in which such power may be exercised---In many ways, adherence to the exhaustion of alternate remedies rule helps to reduce the burden placed on constitutional Courts---In presence of an alternate remedy a writ petition is not maintainable---It is evident that under section 38 of the University of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Act, 1985, an alternative remedy in the form of an appeal to the Syndicate was available to the petitioner---Instead of availing this option, the petitioner rushed to the High Court and filed a writ petition just six days after his removal order was issued---High Court had not committed any illegality while passing the impugned judgment dismissing writ petition filed by the Assistant Professor---Petition for leave to appeal, being meritless, was dismissed.
Muhammad Munir v. Chairman Azad Jammu and Kashmir Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education and others 2006 SCR 29 ref.
(b) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974)---
----Arts. 42 & 44---University of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Act (XXXIV of 1985), S. 38---Associate Professor at the University of Azad Jammu and Kashmir---Removal from service, challenging of---Right of appeal, non-availing of---Writ petition before the High Court---Maintainability---High Court dismissed the writ petition on the basis that the petitioner had the right to file an appeal before the Syndicate---Validity---Rule of exhaustion of alternate remedy is not an absolute one---There may be exceptional cases where a person may be permitted to seek judicial review despite the availability of an alternate remedy, but frequent deviation from the general rule will overwhelm the constitutional Courts with matters that could be addressed by alternative fora---Moreover, strict adherence to this settled principle will improve the functioning of statutory bodies in resolving disputes, reducing the need to invoke the jurisdiction of judicial review---High Court had not committed any illegality while passing the impugned judgment dismissing writ petition filed by the Assistant Professor---Petition for leave to appeal, being meritless, was dismissed.
PLD 1996 SC 246 ref.
(c) Judicial review---
----Principle---Adequate alternate remedy----Under common law, remedy of judicial review through writ jurisdiction is also not available in presence of adequate alternate remedy and this principle has been settled by the English Courts---It is settled there that remedy by way of judicial review should be treated only as a remedy of last resort and should only be used in exceptional circumstances when other remedies, which could provide efficacious redressal, have been properly exhausted by a litigant.
R. v. IRC, Ex parte Preston [1985] BTC 208 and Regina v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Swati, [1986] 1 WLR 477 ref.
(d) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974)---
----Arts. 42 & 44---University of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Act (XXXIV of 1985), S. 38---Associate Professor at the University of Azad Jammu and Kashmir---Removal from service, challenging of---Right of appeal, non-availing of---Writ petition before the High Court---Maintainability---Petitioner approached the Supreme Court as High Court dismissed his writ petition on the basis that the petitioner had the right to file an appeal before the Syndicate---Validity---Claim of the petitioner is that he submitted an application requesting for supplying the copies of relevant record necessary for filing an appeal before the Syndicate ; he deposited the requisite fee and attempted to submit the appeal, but the relevant officer refused to accept it, forcing him to submit the appeal via email---Validity---Story narrated by the petitioner before the Supreme Court regarding filing of appeal appeared to be an afterthought, as there was no mentioning of it in (memo of) the original writ petition before the High Court---High Court had not committed any illegality while passing the impugned judgment dismissing writ petition filed by the Assistant Professor---Petition for leave to appeal, being meritless, was dismissed.
Muhammad Saghir Javed, Advocate for Petitioner.
Raja Gul Majeed Khan, Advocate for Respondents.