Law: Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 1977

Section: R.5(4),7(1)(2)(c)

Law: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 1986

Section: R.3(1)

Law: Sindh Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 1980

Section: R.3(1)

Law: Balochistan Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 2013

Section: R.5

Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 1977--- ----Rr. 5(4), 7(1)(c) & 7(2)---Civil Services Rules (Punjab), Vol. 1, Chapt. XIV, Section III, Cls. 14.21(1)(c) & 14.21(2)---Balochistan Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 2013, R. 5---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 1986, R. 3(1)---Sindh Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 1980, R. 3(1)--- Appeal before Service Tribunal, competency of---Where departmental appeal/representation/review was barred by limitation, whether the appeal before the Service Tribunal was ipso facto incompetent and had to be dismissed---Held, that for purposes of Provinces of Balochistan, Sindh and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, if the departmental appeal/representation/review was filed beyond the prescribed period, then the delay may be condoned if the appellate authority was satisfied that, inter alia, it "was for reasons beyond the control of the appellant", or "sufficient cause" was shown (as the case may be)---As regards the Federation and the Province of Punjab the appeal/representation/ revision may be "withheld" if filed after the prescribed period and the appellant was unable to show any reasonable cause for the delay---In both categories, a departmental appeal was not to be dismissed outright if beyond time; the delay could be condoned---Supreme Court (i.e. current two-Member Bench) after its interpretation of the relevant provisions of law observed that the case law/ s on the subject did not appear to take into consideration the actual terms of the relevant statutory provisions, therefore, the state of the law on the subject could only be regarded as unsettled; that accordingly, there was an urgent need for the law to be settled and made certain, which could only happen if the matter was considered by a Larger Bench---His Lordship observed that Office to place present appeal before the Chief Justice for such orders as were deemed appropriate. Chairman PIAC and others v. Nasim Malik PLD 1990 SC 951 held to be per incuriam. State Bank of Pakistan v. Khyber Zaman and others 2004 SCMR 1426; Anwarul Haq v. Federation of Pakistan 1995 SCMR 1505; Anwar Muhammad v. General Manager, Pakistan Railways and another 1995 SCMR 950; Muhammad Jan…

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