Case Details

Citation(s)
2010 SLG 758 2010 SLD 758 2010 PLJ 28
Supreme Court (AJ&K)
C.A. No. 73 of 2007, decision Dated: 11.09.2008. Date of hearing: 21.05.2008. (On appeal from the judgment of Service Tribunal Dated 14.05.2007, in Service Appeal No. 291 of 2004]
KHAWAJA SHAHAD AHMED, JUSITCE
Mr. M. Tabassum Aftab Alvi, Advocate for Appellants. Raja Gul Majeed Khan, Advocate-General, Syed Nazir Hussain Shah Kazmi & Kh. Muhammad Nasim, Advocates for
Respondents.

SYED ZULFIQAR ALI SHAH AND 2 OTHERS

VS

QAISER AURANGZEB, NAIB TEHSILDAR, PRESENTLY POSTED AS TEHSILDAR BARNALA, DISTRICT BHIMBER AND 5 OTHERS

Law:

Section:

Civil Servants Act, 1976 (VI of 1976)-- ----Ss. 6 & 7(2)--Order of promotion can be given retrospective effect in favour of a person who is occupying a vacancy in the department but if the vacancy was created by artificial means, retrospective effect cannot be given to a promotion order--An incumbent can claim is benefit of grade and pay of that post, which he served for such a long time. Civil Servcants Act, 1976 (VI of 1976)-- ----Ss. 6 & 7(2)--Civil servant--Promotion--Question of--Whether the appellants could be granted regular appointment/seniority on the ground of their continuously holding the post of naib tehsildar on temporary, current-charge or officiating basis--Held: In a case reported as PLJ 2000 SC (AJ&K) 88 the appex Court disallowed ante-date promotion of persons who were promoted as tehsildars against the quota reserved for direct quota of tehsildars--Appeal dismissed. 2005 SCR 242, rel. PLJ 2000 SC (AJ&K) 88, ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: KH. SHAHAD AHMED, JUSITCE:---.----- The instant appeal has been directed against a judgment recorded by the Azad Jammu & Kashmir Service Tribunal on 14.5.2007 whereby Service Appeal No. 291/04 filed by Respondent No. 1 has been accepted by holding that the promotion order of the appellants, herein, issued on 12.5.2004 doesn't affect seniority of Respondent No. 4, herein. Leave to appeal was granted in the instant case on 27.6.2007. 2. Factual matrix of the case, as has been placed before the Court in the memo of appeal as well as in the concise statement, is that Appellant No. 1, herein, who was working as Qanungo, was promoted against the post of Naib Tehsildar on 6.3.1999 and subsequently was promoted as officiating Naib Tehsildar on 3.5.2001. Appellant No. 2 was promoted against the post of Naib Tehsildar on current-charge basis on 14.5.1996 and on 21.1.1998 he was also promoted as Naib Tehsildar on officiating basis. Similarly Appellant No. 3 was promoted as Naib Tehsildar on current-charge basis vide order dated 24.9.1999 and again on officiating basis as Naib Tehsildar on 3.5.2001. The Departmental Selection Committee, Respondent No. 6, recommended the promotion of appellants with…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492