Law:

Section:

Sarhad Development Authority Act, 1973-- ----S. 29--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 185(3)--Leave to appeal--Notification of promotion on recommendation of D.P.C.--Petition was allowed--Notification was set aside--Rules for recruitment of officers--Validity--Omission, prima facie, shows that Government, in absence of proposed Rules is regulating service of authority by exercising its unstructured discretion in recruitment/promotion of officers and employees in authority--Supreme Court, therefore, directed Government of KPK to comply with provisions of Section 29 of Act within three months and submit compliance report to Registrar of Supreme Court--Exercise of jurisdiction by High Court is immaterial, as officer who is aggrieved by impugned has not challenged it before Supreme Court--Grant of leave by Supreme Court under Art. 185(3) of Constitution is discretionary-- Authority has no locus standi to invoke jurisdiction of Supreme Court and is bound by its own Rules, which permit respondent to be promoted under its rules as has been determined by High Court--Petition was dismissed. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: Amir Hani Muslim, J.- This Petition for leave to Appeal is directed against judgment dated 22.1.2015, passed by the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar, whereby writ petition filed by the Respondent No. 1 was allowed and the Notification of Promotion of the Respondent No. 9 was struck down. 2. The facts necessary for decision of the present petition are that the Respondent No. 1 filed writ petition before the Peshawar High Court, praying therein to set aside the Notification of Promotion of the Respondent No. 9 against the Post of General Manager (Administration) (BS-19) being violative of the Sarhad Development Authority (Appointment of Employees) Rules, 1977 framed under the Sarhad Development Authority Act, 1973. The Respondent No. 1 pleaded in the writ petition that he was the senior most BS-18 officer of Managerial Cadre in the Sarhad Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the Authority) and Promotion of the Respondent No. 9, who belongs to the Finance Cadre, was against the said Rules. At the relevant time the Respondent No. 1 was working as…

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