IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Shariat Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa  
Mr. Justice Tariq Parvez  
Mr. Justice Dr. Muhammad Khalid Masud 
 
 
 
Civil Shariat Appeals No. 1 and 2 of 2014 
(Against the judgment dated 10.02.2014 passed by the Federal 
Shariat Court, Islamabad in Service Appeals No. 1 and 2 of 2013) 
 
 
 
Amjad Ali  
 
 
(in both cases) 
…Appellant 
 
 
 
 
 
versus 
 
Federal Shariat Court through its Registrar 
 
 
 
 
 
(in both cases) 
 
 
 
     …Respondents 
                
 
 
For the appellant: 
In person  
(in both cases) 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Abdul Rasheed Awan, Deputy 
Attorney-General for Pakistan 
Qari Abdul Rashid, AOR 
(in both cases) 
 
Date of hearing: 
 
 
28.06.2016 
 
JUDGMENT 
 
Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, J.: The 
impugned 
judgment 
passed by the Federal Shariat Court had been passed in two 
service appeals filed by the present appellant and the said 
judgment has been assailed by the appellant before this Court by 
invoking Article 203-F(2B) of the Constitution of the Islamic 
Republic of Pakistan, 1973. We have gone through the provisions 
of Article 203-F of the Constitution as a whole and have found that 
in the said Article different remedies have been provided which 
Civil Shariat Appeals No. 1 and 2 of 2014 
 
2
include an appeal before this Court against a judgment or order 
passed by the Federal Shariat Court in its jurisdiction pertaining to 
Islamization of laws, an appeal before this Court in respect of a 
judgment, final order or sentence passed by the Federal Shariat 
Court in the matter of convictions, acquittals and sentences in 
cases of Hudood laws and it has been provided in Article 203-F(2B) 
that where an appeal does not lie to this Court as provided in the 
other clauses of Article 203-F there an appeal may lie to this Court 
after obtaining leave to appeal. According to our understanding of 
Article 203-F of the Constitution no appeal lies before this Court 
against a judgment or order passed by the Federal Shariat Court in 
service matters of its employees and likewise the matter of leave to 
appeal contemplated by the provisions of Article 203-F(2B) of the 
Constitution is also not relevant to the judgments or orders of the 
Federal Shariat Court passed in the service matters of its 
employees. The appellant appearing in person has drawn our 
attention towards Article 212 of the Constitution and we have 
noticed that the said Article provides for establishment of 
administrative courts or tribunals but clauses (a), (b) and (c) of 
Article 212(1) of the Constitution deal with specific subjects or 
areas regarding which an administrative court or tribunal may be 
established. We do not find an administrative court or tribunal 
established for administrative matters of the employees of the 
Federal Shariat Court to be falling within any of the said clauses of 
Article 212(1) of the Constitution and, thus, from a judgment or 
order passed in a service appeal by the Federal Shariat Court no 
appeal or petition for leave to appeal lies before this Court even by 
invoking clause (3) of Article 212 of the Constitution. Be that as it 
may clause (3) of Article 212 of the Constitution may even 
otherwise not be attracted because the case of the appellant 
essentially raises issues which are purely factual and personal to 
the appellant and the same do not involve any substantial question 
of law of public importance.  
 
Civil Shariat Appeals No. 1 and 2 of 2014 
 
3
2. 
For what has been discussed above we have found these 
appeals filed before this Court to have been filed without 
jurisdiction and the same are, therefore, dismissed as not 
maintainable.  
  
 
Chairman 
Member 
 
Member 
Islamabad 
28.06.2016 
Approved for reporting.  
 
Arif 
 
