Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Appeal On Latches

    Uploaded by

    Fargham Sandhu
    9 views30 pages
    Appeal on latches

    Original Title

    appeal on latches

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Appeal on latches

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    9 views30 pages

    Appeal On Latches

    Uploaded by

    Fargham Sandhu
    Appeal on latches

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 30
    pH IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN (Appellate Jurisdiction) Present: Mr. Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, HC] ‘Mr. Justice Rahmat Hussain Jafferi ‘Mr. Justice Ghulam Rabbani CIVIL APPEAL NOS.172-K TO 175-K, 177-K TO 182-K OF 2009. (On appeal from the judgment dated 3.72008, 14.10.2008, 28.11.2008 passed by High Court of Sindh at Karachi in CP. Nos. D-2042 t D-2046/07, D101, D-1870 to D-1572/2007) Pakistan International Airline Corp. sin CA 172-K to 175-K, &179-K to 181-K/2009 Zafar Ahmad Khan sean CA 177-K/2009 Salman Javed it CA 178-K/2009 Muhammad Manzoor in CA 182-K/2009 ‘Appellants Versus Tanweer-ur-Rehman vein CA 172-K/09 Adnan Ahmed Malik in CA 173-K/09 Adnan Zoraiz Qureshi sein CA 174-K/09 Roopa Syed CA 175-K/09 Zafar Ahmed Khan & others in CA 179-K/09 Slaman Javed & another in CA 180-K/09 Mahmood Manzoor & another in CA 181-K/09 Federation of Pakistan & others ssain CAS 177-K to 178-K & 182-K/09 Respondents For the PIAC For the Employees Date of Hearing Mr. Khalid Javed, ASC with Mrs. Shiraz. [gbal Ch. AOR (in CAS 172K to 175-K/03) Mr. Mazhar Ali B. Chohan, AOR (CA 179-K to 181-K/09) Syed Shahenshah Hussain, ASC with Mr. Ghulam Qadir Jatoi, AOR (CA 17K, 178K & 182-K/03) Mr.AS.K Ghoti, AOR (in CA 175-%/09) Nemo (in other cases) 03.02.2010. in JUDGMENT: IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C].~ Listed Appeals, by leave of the Court, are directed against the judgments dated 03.07.2008, 14.10.2008, 28.11.2008 passed by High Court of Sindh at Karachi in C.P. Nos. D-2042 to D-2044/07, D-101/2007, D- 11570 to D-1572/2007, respectively, As common questions of law are involved in all the cases, we intend to dispose them of by means of instant common judgment. 2 Leave to appeal was granted in one set of the cases i. Civil Appeal Nos. 177-K to 182-K of 2009 on the following grounds: 1) Whether the period of 90 days prescribed in clause () of para 109 ofthe judgment in case of Muhammad Mubee us-Slam and another versus Federation of Pakistan aand_others (PUD 2006 SC 602) will be applicable to the Constitutional Petitions filed rider Article 199 of the Constitution for which no period of limitation is prescribed under any law Scbject however, tothe question of letches; ii) Whether the afore noted period of 90 days shall be applicable to those cnses where a period of time is prescribed by laa sand thet has not expired; ‘i) Whether Constitutional Petition against Pakistan International Airlines being a Corporation having no statutory rules would be maintainable in cases of disputes as regards the terms and conditions of its employees, more particularly as, the Pakistan International Airlines was not performing any factions in connection with the affairs of the Federation, 3 However, in the remaining cases (Civil Appeal Nos. 172-K to 175-K/09), leave was granted pursuant to the above order. CALIT1-K/2009, te. 3 au7 Relevant facts of each case, in brief, are as under:~ C.A.172-K to 174-K/2009: In these appeals respondents joined the Pokistan International Aislines Corporation (hereinafter referred to as ‘appellant-corporation’) as Fist Officer on F.27 Aircraty, vide separate agreements all dated 30.10.2003 on contract basis. Article 1 of the agreement stipulates that the said agreement shall semain in force for a period of five years, extendable or till the depending upon the sole requirement of the appellant-corporation. It further clarifies that the position of the respondents is exclusively on contract and is not liable for absorption on permanent besi in the appellant-

    You might also like