close
Thursday November 28, 2024

Punjab Irrigation Dept plea time-barred: CJP says what can they do if govt sleeps over its own right

By Our Correspondent
February 01, 2020

LAHORE: Supreme Court Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmad rebuked the Punjab government for delayed filing of appeals to challenge decisions of the Lahore High Court.

“What can we do if the government does not awake from slumber for its own right?” regretted the chief justice hearing an appeal by Punjab Irrigation Department Friday at the Lahore Registry. Justice Umar Ata Bandial and Justice Ijazul Ahsan joined the chief justice on a three-member bench that found the department’s appeal time-barred.

The chief justice observed that apparently the department intentionally delayed the appeal against the decision of the Lahore High Court whereas the impugned decision was full of illegalities. He ordered an additional advocate general to ensure that the officials responsible for the delay in filing of appeals were taken to task. Separately, the bench dismissed an appeal by the provincial government against the appointment of a woman Secondary School Teacher (SST) of physics. The additional advocate general argued that education policy 2011 required that a SST must be a subject specialist but the respondent woman Shumaila had been appointed as physics teacher despite having not studied the subject in FSc and MSc. However, the bench observed that the advertisement for the post had not mentioned such requirement for FSc whereas the respondent studied physics in BSc.

The bench dismissed the appeal. Meanwhile, the bench also dismissed an appeal of a ‘patwari’ terminated on charge of misappropriation in government fee for mutation. The bench observed that the appellant/’patwari’ caused loss to the public exchequer and did not deserve any concession. Sheikh Mubarak through his counsel contended that he was accused of not depositing Rs75,000 of mutation fee in the government treasury.

He said the department terminated him without affording an opportunity of hearing. The appellant said he faced no allegation of corruption during his 32-year long career. He asked the court to issue order for his reinstatement. However, the bench dismissed the appeal.