In the Court of Mr.

Yasir Hussain Khan, Civil Judge-III,

Muzaffargarh.

Muhammad Asim Khan

Vs.
Kot Addu Power Co. through its General Manager and another

DECLARATORY SUIT &

SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION.

WRITTEN STATEMENT.

Preliminary Objections: -

Respectfully Sheweth: -

1. That the plaintiff having handed over the possession of the

quarter on 12.5.2002, hence, has got no locus standi to file the
present suit. The suit is barred by law & liable to be rejected.

2. That the plaintiff has got no cause of action against the

answering respondent as he handed over the possession of the
quarter on expiry of one month notice period as per rules
issued to him. Hence, the suit is liable to be rejected.

3. That the plaintiff is estopped by his own conduct to file the

instant suit. Hence, the suit is liable to be rejected.

4. That the plaintiff has not come to the court with clean hands,
hence, the suit is liable to be rejected.

5. That the contents of the suit are based on malafide and ulterior
motive. Hence, the suit is liable to be rejected.
6. That the suit is frivolous and vexatious, hence, is liable to be
rejected.

7. That this Hon’ble Court lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the

matter as the plaintiff is a civil servant for the purpose of
Services Tribunal Act; and the matter pertains to the terms and
conditions of employment.

8. That most of the averments are beyond the scope of enquiry in a

civil court as they relate to terms and conditions of service.

9. That the plaintiff was a licensee and under the terms of the
allotment, could not retain the possession of the house beyond
the terms as per rules.

10.That this court has no jurisdiction to entertain the matter and suit
is not maintainable in its present form.

11.That the suit cannot proceed for non-joinder of necessary parties

as the house was allotted to the person entitled to it and his rights
are involved.

12.That the plaintiff is estopped to file this suit by his conduct.

On facts: -

1. That the contents of para No. 1 are not denied, however it is

pertinent to mention here that the plaintiff committed acts of
misconduct, for which he was charge-sheeted, he submitted
his reply to the charge-sheet which was found unsatisfactory
and as a result of that, an Inquiry Committee was formed to
enquire into the matter. The plaintiff participated in the
enquiry proceedings along-with the witnesses, he admitted his
guilt of committing acts of misconduct. He was issued a
second show cause notice to which he replied, which was
unsatisfactory. He was also given opportunity of personal
hearing, but he failed to bring any cogent reason in his
defence. And as a result, he was dismissed from the service.

2. That in reply to para No. 2, it is submitted, as narrated above

in para No. 1, the dismissal order passed by respondent No. 2
is legal and proper. Rest of the contents pertain to procedure
 for filing the appeal before the Federal Services Tribunal as
the plaintiff is a civil servant.

3. That in reply to para No. 3, it is submitted that contents of

this para relate to the procedure only, which he has adopted
for seeking redressal of his grievance against the order of
dismissal dated 12.4.2003.

4. That the contents of para No. 4 are not admitted as narrated. It

is submitted that after the dismissal, the plaintiff can retain
the house for a period of one month from the date of his
dismissal in the light of WAPDA rules as on 27.6.1996
protected for staff under the staff agreement signed on
27.6.1996 between the Govt. of Pakistan, WAPDA and
Pakistan WAPDA Hydro-electric Central Labour Union. It is
pertinent to mention here that the plaintiff was issued notice
for vacation of the quarter, which expired on 12.5.2003 and
thereafter, the plaintiff handed over the possession to the
answering defendant, rest of para are not admitted correct.

5. That in reply to para No. 5, it is submitted that plaintiff’s

dismissal from service has attained finality and the plaintiff
was rightly issued notice dated 18.4.2003 to vacate the
quarter, because, as already submitted above, the dismissed
employee can retain the quarter only for one month after his
dimissal from service. So, the contents of para No. 5 are not
admitted as correct, as a result, he vacated the house and
himself handed over the possession.

6. That para No. 6 is not admitted as correct. He was given

notice and he himself handed over the possession of quarter
on 12.5.2003 and the quarter was allotted to M/s Wackenhut
on 14.5.2003.

7. That para No. 7 is not admitted as correct.

8. That para No. 8 is not admitted as correct. The plaintiff has

got no cause of action at present to move the instant suit as he
has already handed over the possession of the quarter.
9. That para No. 9 of the suit is not admitted as the plaintiff does
no more reside within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court.

10. That para No. 10 is legal, hence, no comments.

Prayer clause of the suit is not admitted as

narrated. The plaintiff has handed over the possession
of the quarter to the answering defendant and as an
after-thought, has filed the present suit, which is not
based on law and facts. Hence, same is liable to be
dismissed with special costs in the interest of justice.

Humble Defendant,

Dated: _______

Through: -

RIAZ-UL-HASSAN,
Advocate,
6-A, Ahsan Colony,
Suraj Miani Road,
Multan.

Verification: -
Verified on oath at Muzaffargarh on this
____ day of June, 2003 that all the contents
of the above-titled written reply including
preliminary objections 1 to 6 and on facts
from para No. 1 to 7 are true to the best of
my knowledge and para No. 8 to 10 and
prayer are correct to my belief.

Defendants
 In the Court of Mr. Yasir Hussain Khan, Civil Judge-III,
Muzaffargarh.

Muhammad Asim Khan

Vs.
Kot Addu Power Co. through its General Manager and another

DECLARATORY SUIT &

SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION.

Application for temporary injunction.

WRITTEN REPLY

Preliminary Objections: -
Respectfully Sheweth: -

1. That all the contents for grant of stay i.e. prima facie, balance
of convenience and irreparable loss are missing, hence, this
application is liable to rejected, conversely, balance of
convenience and loss is in favour of respondents/defendants.

2. That the application has become infructuous as possession is

with the respondents/defendants authority.

3. That the application is not at all maintainable as the applicant

himself has handed over the possession of the quarter and
now with malafide intention has filed the present application.
He is estopped by his conduct.

On Facts: -

1. That para No. 1 is admitted. Reply to the instant application is

being filed before this Hon’ble Court, the contents of which
are not being reproduced for the purpose of brevity and the
same may be read as part and parcel of this application.
2. That in reply to para No. 2, it is submitted that the applicant
was dismissed from service after adopting proper disciplinary
procedure. Whereas other contents of para No. 2, they relate
to the procedure for filing appeal before the Hon’ble Federal
Services Tribunal. As regards plaintiff’s dismissal from
service, it has attained finality and he is no more an employee
of the company.

3. That para No. 3 is not admitted correct. The applicant on

expiry of one month notice period, handed over the
possession of the quarter on 12.5.2003.

4. That para No. 4 is not admitted correct. According to rules, he

is bound to vacate the quarter in the period of one month from
the dismissal, which he did; and handed over the possession
to the defendant/respondent.

5. That para No. 5 is incorrect. Balance of convenience does not

lean in favour of the applicant as held by Hon’ble Supreme
Court of Pakistan in a judgment 1989 S.C.M.R. 1855.

6. That para No. 6 is incorrect.

7. That para No. 7 is incorrect. The applicant is not likely to face

any irreparable loss to the applicant as held in the above
mentioned judgment.

8. Counter affidavit is attached.

In view of the above, it is prayed that this

application may please be dismissed in the interest of
justice with special costs.

Humble Defendants,

Through: -
RIAZ-UL-HASSAN,
Advocate,
6-A, Ahsan Colony,
Suraj Miani Road,
Multan.
 In the Court of Mr. Yasir Hussain Khan, Civil Judge-III,
Muzaffargarh.

Muhammad Asim Khan

Vs.
Kot Addu Power Co. through its General Manager

DECLARATORY SUIT &

SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION.

Application for temporary injunction.

WRITTEN REPLY ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENTS

Affidavit of: -
Muhammad Umair Khan, General Manager, Administration
& Human Resources.

I, the above-named deponent do hereby solemnly

affirm and declare as under: -

1. That the contents of reply to stay application are true

and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and
nothing is concealed.

2. That the contents to reply to stay application may

kindly be considered as part & parcel of this affidavit,
which are true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief and nothing is concealed.

3. That the contents of affidavit are correct and nothing is

concealed.

DEPONENT
 In the Court of Mr. Yasir Hussain Khan, Civil Judge-III,
Muzaffargarh.

Muhammad Asim Khan

Vs.
Kot Addu Power Co. through its General Manager and another

DECLARATORY SUIT

Application U/O-39, Rule 2(3) C.P.C. for Contempt of Court.

WRITTEN REPLY.

Preliminary Objections: -

Respectfully Sheweth: -

1. That the applicant having handed over the possession of the

quarter voluntarily on 12.5.2002, on expiry of one month notice
period as per rules issued to him. Hence, has got no cause of
action and locus standi to file the present application. The
application is barred by law & liable to be rejected

2. That the applicant is estopped by his own conduct to file the

instant application. Hence, the applicant is liable to rejection.

3. That the applicant has not come to the court with clean hands,
hence, the application is liable to be rejected.

4. That this Hon’ble Court lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate upon

the matter as the applicant/plaintiff is a civil servant for the
purpose of Services Tribunal Act; and the matter pertains to
the terms and conditions of employment. Hence, the
application is liable to rejection.
5. That the answering respondents have not at all violated the
orders of this Hon’ble Court, hence, this application is liable
to be rejected.

On facts: -

1. That contents of para No. 1 are formal.

2. That contents of para No. 2 are not denied.

3. That contents of para No. 3 are not admitted as correct.

However, it is pertinent to mention here that
applicant/plaintiff filed a declaratory suit on 12.5.2003 and
status quo was ordered to be observed by this Hon’ble Court
on 19.5.03 and the answering respondents received the same
after 19.5.03. Whereas the applicant/plaintiff himself vacated
the quarter in dispute voluntarily in response to the notice
issued to him for vacation of the quarter as per rules
applicable to the respondent establishment. But with malafide
intention and evil designs, the applicant/plaintiff having
concealing all the material facts, filed a suit and present
application in this Hon’ble Court. In fact, the answering
respondents have never violated the directions of this Hon’ble
Court. The answering respondents are responsible persons.
They cannot even think to take law in their own hands,
because they are law-abiding officials. It is also worth-
mentioning here that the applicant has not brought the so-
called occurrence in the notice of high-ups of the answering
respondents. Even otherwise, the applicant/plaintiff has not
moved to the concerned quarters of criminal jurisdiction. This
shows clearly, malafide on the part of the applicant/plaintiff.
The fact remains that after the dismissal from service and
pursuance of notice of vacation. The applicant voluntarily
vacated the quarter on 12.5.2003 and he also took away all
the belongings/articles, but with malafide intention and in
order to achieve his evil designs, with ulterior motive, he filed
the present application, narrating therein fake, fictitious and
 vague articles/house-hold items and prize bonds etc. to
implicate the answering respondents unnecessarily, which is
totally against the factual position.

4. That contents of para No. 4 are denied being incorrect. The

answering respondents cannot even think of committing
contempt of court.

5. That contents of para No. 5 are denied being incorrect. The

fact is that the answering respondents are law-abiding persons
and cannot think of taking law in their own hands.

6. That affidavit is false. Counter affidavit is attached.

Prayer of the applicant is totally false and

baseless. It is therefore, respectfully prayed that the
instant application may please be dismissed with costs.

Answering Respondents,

Dated: ________

1.____________________

2.____________________

Through: -
RIAZ-UL-HASSAN,
Advocate,
6-A, Ahsan Colony,
Suraj Miani Road,
Multan.
 In the Court of Mr. Yasir Hussain Khan, Civil Judge-III,
Muzaffargarh.

Muhammad Asim Khan

Vs.
Kot Addu Power Co. through its General Manager and another

DECLARATORY SUIT

Application U/O-39, Rule 2(3) C.P.C. for Contempt of Court.

WRITTEN REPLY.

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Muhammad Umair Khan, General Manager, Administration
& Human Resources.

I, the above-named deponent do hereby solemnly

affirm and declare as under: -

1. That the contents of reply to the above-titled application

are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief
and nothing is concealed.

2. That the contents to reply to the above-titled application

may kindly be considered as part & parcel of this affidavit,
which are true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief and nothing is concealed.

3. That the contents of affidavit are correct and nothing is

concealed.

DEPONENT
 In the Court of Mr. Yasir Hussain Khan, Civil Judge-III,
Muzaffargarh.

Muhammad Asim Khan

Vs.
Kot Addu Power Co. through its General Manager and another

DECLARATORY SUIT

Application U/O-39, Rule 2(3) C.P.C. for Contempt of Court.

WRITTEN REPLY.

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Muhammad Usman, Security Inspector, Kot Addu Power Co.
Kot Addu, District Muzaffargarh.

I, the above-named deponent do hereby solemnly

affirm and declare as under: -

1. That the contents of reply to the above-titled application

are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief
and nothing is concealed.

2. That the contents to reply to the above-titled application

may kindly be considered as part & parcel of this affidavit,
which are true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief and nothing is concealed.

3. That the contents of affidavit are correct and nothing is

concealed.

DEPONENT
 In the Court of Mr. Yasir Hussain Khan, Civil Judge-III,
Muzaffargarh.

Muhammad Asim Khan

Vs.
Kot Addu Power Co. through its General Manager and another

DECLARATORY SUIT &

SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION.

Application U/o-7, r-10 & 11 C.P.C.

Respectfully Sheweth: -

1. That the titled suit is pending adjudication before this

Hon’ble Court and is fixed for 17.07.03.

2. That this Hon’ble Court lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate upon

the matter, as the plaintiff/respondent is civil servant for the
purpose of Service Tribunal Act and the matter pertains to the
terms & conditions of employment as held by the Supreme
Court of Pakistan in a reported judgment SCMR 2001 page
1898. Most of the averments are beyond the scope of enquiry
in a civil court as they relate to the terms & conditions of
employment and as such is barred by law. The proper forum
to file such like cases is Federal Services Tribunal. Hence, the
same is liable to be rejected.

3. That the plaintiff/respondent has got no cause of action and

locus standi to file the present suit. Hence, the same is liable
to be rejected.
4. That in case the litigation continues, there is every likelihood
to arise further legal complications. Hence the suit is liable to
be rejected.

Affidavit is attached.

In view of the above humble submissions,

it is respectfully prayed that the application in
hand may graciously be accepted and the suit of
the plaintiff/respondent may kindly be
rejected/dismissed in the interest of justice.

Applicant/defendant,

Dated: ________

Through: -

1. RIAZ-UL-HASSAN,
Advocate,

2. Muhammad Jamil Qureshi

Advocate, Seat No.
District Courts, Muzaffargarh.
 In the Court of Mr. Yasir Hussain Khan, Civil Judge-III,
Muzaffargarh.

Muhammad Asim Khan

Vs.
Kot Addu Power Co. through its General Manager and another

DECLARATORY SUIT &

SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION.

Application U/o-7, r-10 & 11 C.P.C.

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Muhammad Umair Khan, General Manager, Administration
& Human Resources.

I, the above-named deponent do hereby solemnly

affirm and declare as under: -

1. That the above-titled application is being filed before this

Hon’ble Court the contents of which may kindly be
considered as part & parcel of this affidavit.

2. That all the contents of the above titled application are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and
nothing is concealed.

DEPONENT