Case Details

Citation(s)
2016 SLG 3495 2016 SLD 3495 2016 PLC 1151
Supreme Court (AJ&K)

MOHAMMAD AZAM KHAN, CHIEF, JUSTICE AND CH. MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM ZIA, J
Sardar Karam Dad, Advocate for Appellant (in Civil Appeal No. 65 of 2014). Asghar Ali Malik, Advocate for
Respondents (in Civil Appeal No. 65 of 2014). Raja Gul Majeed Khan, Advocate for Appellant (in Civil Appeal No. 66 of 2014). Sardar Muhammad Riaz

TASKEEN NAZ

VS

FEHMIDA BEGUM AND 11 OTHERS NASEEM AKHTAR Vs DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER ELEMENTARY (FEMALE), DISTRICT SUDHNUTI AND 9 OTHERS AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY AND 2 OTHERS Vs NIGAH SULTANA AND

Law:

Section:

Azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Servants Act (VI of 1976)--- --------S. 12---Azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services Pension Rules, 1971, R.3.5---Conditional appointment of employee---Non-fulfillment of condition by employees---Retirement of employees from service after completion of 25 years of service---Principle of audi alteram partem---Applicability---Public interest---Primary teachers, in the present case, were appointed in Education Department due to non-availability of matriculate candidates, subject to acquire by them the requisite qualification i.e. matriculation---Employees could not improve their qualification and they were retired from service---Validity---None of the employees had challenged any provision of the Rules made under Azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Servants Act, 1976---Said Rules might have application for the purpose of regulating the terms and conditions of service of teachers of education department---Civil servant could be retired on completion of 25 years of service or earlier in the public interest---Retirement orders passed after 25 years of service could not be held to be without lawful authority---Primary teachers had been retired on completion of due process with full pensionary benefits---Employees from the day one were aware of the fact that for continuation of service they would have to improve their qualification and pass the matriculation examination---Employees could not improve their educational qualification in 25 years and could not fulfill the imposed conditions---Sufficient opportunity had been provided to the employees and principle of audi alteram partem had not been violated---Retirement orders of the employees were in the public interest---Candidates who had been selected on merit were highly qualified---Notifications of retirement of employees would be effective from the date of issuance---Retired employees would be entitled for the pensionary benefits accordingly---If any service had been rendered by them after the impugned notifications then same should be treated as re-employment on contract---Retired employees whose retirement orders had been set aside by the Service Tribunal and such order had not been challenged…
🔒
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