2/13/24, 9:54 PM pakistanlawsite.com/Login/ReferenceCaseLawSearch?

CaseName=2018Q2007&&court= &&Row=0 &&bookName=undefined

Caselaw Search

Statutes Search

Courtwise Search

Citation Search

Advance Search

Case Law Search 

Enter Keyword Enter Court Last 5 Year Search

Citation Name: 2018 PLC(CS) 292 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN Bookmark this Case 

FATIMA VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Commerce, Islamabad

Applicability--Term , Legitimate expectation, doctrine of--Term , Locus Poenitentiae, Principle of--TERM , Promissory
Estoppel--TERM ,

Applicability---Scope.

Constitution of Pakistan 1973--4 ,

Art. 4---Every individual had right to be dealt with in accordance with law.

Applicability--Term , Civil service--Term ,

Withholding of appointment due to restraining order of National Industrial Relations Commission---Locus

poenitentiae, principle of---Applicability---Legitimate expectation, doctrine of---Promissory estoppel, doctrine of---
Applicability-Petitioner was finally selected for appointment but appointment letter was not issued due to restraining
order passed by the National Industrial Relations Commission---Validity---Once process of selection was completed
in an ordinary manner, same could not be upset in an arbitrary manner---Process of recruitment was completed and
all decisive steps had been taken for petitioner's appointment---Right had accrued to the petitioner for job against
vacancy for which she had been selected---Any lapse or delay in executing formality would not render such process
incomplete---Department had no power of locus poenitentiae to retract their steps---Department could have
retracted its steps till such time that the merit list had not left the fold of their office---Once merit list was made public
creating right in favour of petitioner then power of department to withheld the same had been taken away by law---
Issuance of appointment letter was only consequential step which at the best be termed to be ministerial---Petitioner
had been selected after securing the highest marks---Candidate developed legitimate expectation to be considered
for appointment as soon as the lis before the National Industrial Relations Commission attained finality---Neither
qualification for the post in question was altered nor post was abolished by the public authority---No valid reason
had been rendered for denying the appointment to the petitioner---Public authority under the doctrine of promissory
estoppel was bound to fulfill its promise to the citizen with regard to her inalienable right---Doctrine of legitimate
expectation would come into play, in circumstances, and petitioner was entitled to get the benefit thereof---Ban
imposed subsequent to the selection could not take away the right of the petitioner which had already accrued to
her---Ban if any could at the best be applied retrospectively---No impediment or ban existed in employing the
petitioner---Petitioner had now gone over-aged due to reluctance of respondent to discharge their lawful authority
with diligence---Authorities were directed to issue formal appointment letter in favour of petitioner for the post in
question within a period of one month---Constitutional petition was allowed in circumstances.
✉

https://www.pakistanlawsite.com/login/check 1/3