Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 2883 2021 SLD 2883 2021 PLC 1540
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.125479 of 2017, decided on 7th June, 2021.Date of hearing: 25th May, 2021.
Before Anwaar Hussain, J
Kashif Ali Chaudhry for Petitioners. Ibrar Ahmad for
Respondents.

MASOOD KHAN and another

VS

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Chairman Federal Board of Revenue, Islamabad and another

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 212,199

(a) Constitution of Pakistan--- ----Arts. 212 & 199---Civil service---Pro forma promotion---'Eligibility' and 'fitness'---Constitutional petition---Maintainability---Petitioners (retired civil servants) contended that if a civil servant was otherwise eligible for promotion, the bar contained in Art. 212 of the Constitution would not attract---Held, that although the Service Tribunals had exclusive jurisdiction with regard to the matters related to the terms and conditions of a civil servant, however, the terms 'eligibility' and 'fitness' in relation to the promotion entailed different connotation---Question of eligibility primarily related to the terms and conditions of the service and their applicability to the concerned civil servant, therefore, Service Tribunal had jurisdiction in the matter; however, question of fitness was a subjective evaluation on the basis of objective criteria when substitution for an opinion of the competent authority was not possible by that of Service Tribunal or of a Court, and thus, Service Tribunal had no jurisdiction on the question of fitness---Constitutional petition was maintainable. Muhammad Anis and others v. Abdul Haseeb and others PLD 1994 SC 539 ref. Indus Trading and Contracting Company v. Collector of Customs (Preventive) Karachi and others 2016 SCMR 842; National Assembly Secretariat through Secretary v. Manzoor Ahmed and others 2015 SCMR 253 and Government of Sindh through Secretary Education and Literacy Department and others v. Nizakat Ali and others 2011 SCMR 592 distinguished. (b) Civil service--- ----Proforma promotion---Employees working for fifteen years as Supervisors at Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) were retired without promotion because no meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) was held---Record (including comments by the respondent (FBR) revealed that the petitioners were eligible as per applicable rules when they were in service and their promotion was due before their superannuation, however, the same could not be materialized on account of the failure of the respondent department to convene and conduct DPC on administrative ground , which reason was not a plausible one for denying…
🔒
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