Low Graphics Site
White bar
Daily SectionMarker

Misc SectionMarker

Horoscope Recipes Weekly SectionMarker

Weekly SectionMarker

Pakistan's Internet Magazine
Herald
Dawn GroupMarker

Archive, Search, Feedback & HelpMarker

Dawn Classified



FrontPage National International Local Business KSE Forex Sports Editorial Opinion Letters Features Today's Cartoon TV Guide Cowasjee Ayaz Irfan Hussain Review Dawn Magazine Young World Images Dawn Group Subscription To Advertise

DINA
Previous Story DAWN - the Internet Edition Next Story

June 25, 2002 Tuesday Rabi-us-Sani 13, 1423

Click to learn more...
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
.




AJKHC stops govt from taking action against official



By Our Staff Correspondent


MUZAFFARABAD, June 24: AJK High Court on Monday restricted the government from taking any action against a senior officer under the Removal from Service (Special Powers) Act, 2001, after the law and a show cause notice served to him were challenged for being “repugnant to the constitutional provisions.”

Syed Mujahid Hussain Naqvi, counsel for Private Power Cell Director-General Mir Nazir Ahmed, prayed in a writ petition that the impugned act was violative of fundamental rights 14 and 15, of Section 4 of AJK’s interim constitution, as it envisaged “certain persons” against whom it could be applied. Thus an arbitrary system was put in motion thereby creating inequality and discrimination, he argued.

The enactment of the act was mala fide in the presence of Civil Servants Act, 1976, and Efficiency and Discipline Rules, 1977, he said.

Nazir Ahmed was issued a show cause notice for allegedly appointing six line superintendents in the electricity department in 2000 in violation of quota.

Mr Naqvi prayed that the appointments were not made by the petitioner but by the then chief engineer under the orders of the High Court and the Supreme Court. Irregularity or invalidity, if any, in advertisement about the quota, had been rectified by the judgment of the superior courts, and therefore the show cause notice was in violation of those judgments, he said.

Counsel for the respondents, Tabassam Aftab Alvi, contended that the proceedings against the petitioner had been commenced in September 2001 while the petition was filed in May 2002.

Chief Justice Syed Manzoor Hussain Gillani said the violation of a rule was not defined as misconduct in the impugned Act, which persuaded him to admit the petition to examine whether an advertisement for appointment in violation of rules regulating quota amounted to misconduct.

Admitting the petition, the CJ ordered issuance of notices to respondents to file statements and documents by July 22.






Previous Story Top of Page Next Story

Seprater
Contributions
Privacy Policy
© DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2005