ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

PRESENT:

Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi

Justice Mrs. Rashida Asad

High Court Appeal No. 189 of 2021

Date

Order with signature of Judge

Fresh Case

1. For orders on CMA No. 1947/2021.

2. For orders on CMA No. 1948/2021.

3. For hearing of Main Case.

4. For orders on CMA No. 1949/2021.

22.10.2021:

Mr. Javed Asghar Awan, advocate for the appellant.

----------

1. Granted.

2-4. Instant High Court Appeal has been filed against the impugned Orders dated 29.09.2021 and 12.10.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Suit No.Nil (-2362) of 2021 [Dr. Qadir Dad Shah & others v. Pakistan International Airline Company Limited & others] filed by the respondent against the appellants and respondent Nos.2 & 3, seeking Declaration, Cancellation, Permanent Injunction & Damages, with the prayer to declare the impugned Notice/Letter dated 06.09.2021 issued by the appellant for the recovery of the amount paid in lump sum to the respondents as compensation, as illegal and without lawful authority.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned Notice/Letter has been issued pursuant to the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Muhammad Afzal v. Secretary Establishment Division [2021 SCMR 1569], keeping in view the directions as contained in Para: 61 of the aforesaid judgment, therefore, the learned Single Judge was not justified to suspend the operation of the impugned Notice/Letter without hearing the appellant. It has been further contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that learned Single Judge has been further pleased to suspend the operation of the Show Cause Notice dated 12.10.2021 issued by the appellant to the respondent for non-compliance of the earlier Notice in the instant case. It has been prayed that both the impugned orders may be set-aside and learned Single Judge may be directed to pass appropriate order after hearing the parties in accordance with law, keeping in view the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in this regard.

Mr. M. Saad Siddiqui, Advocate has shown appearance pursuant to Notice under Section 43 Rule 3 of the Sindh Chief Court Rules, on behalf of the respondent No. 1, who waives notice of instant High Court Appeal and files vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No.1 and has vehemently opposed the contentions of the learned counsel for appellant and has also raised objection, as to maintainability of instant High Court Appeal, which according to learned counsel, has been filed against an ad-interim interlocutory order passed by the learned Single Judge, while exercising the discretion as vested in Court, whereas, no final order has been passed so far, which otherwise could have been assailed by filing High Court Appeal under Section 15 of the Ordinance, 1980 read with Section 3 of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972. According to learned counsel for the respondent No.1, the appellant is at liberty to file objection before the learned Single Judge and to seek recalling or modification of the impugned ad-interim order passed by the learned Single Judge in the Suit, therefore, prays that instant High Court Appeal may be dismissed in limine.

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge and have observed that after recording contention of learned counsel for the plaintiff in some detail, and while issuing notice to the defendant and the DAG, has been pleased to suspend the operation of the impugned Notice/Letter dated 06.09.2021 till next date of hearing. From perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge in the instant case, it appears that no final order has been passed or decision taken by the learned Single Judge with regard to merits or claim of the respondents, whereas, the appellant is at liberty to file written-statement/objections to the suit, as well as counter-affidavit/objections to the injunction application with a request to recall or modify the ad-interim order, while explaining the entire facts and legal position according to their understanding. It has been observed that tendency to file appeal against an ad-interim interlocutory order has increased, which not only results in multiplicity of litigation, but also amounts to frustrate the proceedings before learned Single Judge seized of the matter yet to be finalized. We are not inclined to interfere with the discretion as vested in Court to grant ad-interim relief, to an aggrieved party, however, keeping in view the peculiar facts of each case in accordance with law.

Since no final order has been passed on the injunction application by the learned Single Judge in the instant case, whereas, learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to point out any patent illegality or jurisdictional defect in the impugned order(s) passed by the learned Single Judge in the instant case, which may otherwise require this Court to interfere with an ad-interim order, therefore, we would dispose of instant High Court Appeal with the directions to the appellant to approach the learned Single Judge by filing urgent application alongwith written-statement/objections to the suit and reply of injunction application with a request to take up the matter for hearing of the parties at an early date, whereas, it is expected that learned Single Judge may grant the urgency and shall pass appropriate order on the injunction application at an early date, preferably, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of hearing, however, strictly in accordance with law.

Instant High Court Appeal stands disposed of in the above terms alongwith listed applications.

J U D G E

A.S./FA