| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 1982 2021 SLD 1982 2021 PLJ 107 |
Islamabad High Court
W.P. No. 1174 of 2017, decided on 22.2.2021, Date of hearing: 22.2.2021.
MOHSIN AKHTAR KAYANI, JUSTICE.
Mr. Muhammad Umair Baloch and Saif-ur-Rehman Shah Bukhari, Advocates for Petitioners. Barrister Umer Aslam and Mudassar Abbas, Advocates for
Respondents No. 1. Mr. Tariq Masood and Saad Tariq, Advocates for
Respondent Nos. 2 to 11.
W.P. No. 1174 of 2017, decided on 22.2.2021, Date of hearing: 22.2.2021.
MOHSIN AKHTAR KAYANI, JUSTICE.
Mr. Muhammad Umair Baloch and Saif-ur-Rehman Shah Bukhari, Advocates for Petitioners. Barrister Umer Aslam and Mudassar Abbas, Advocates for
Respondents No. 1. Mr. Tariq Masood and Saad Tariq, Advocates for
Respondent Nos. 2 to 11.
SHAUKAT HAYAT AWAN SR. ENGINEER (CIVIL) AND 3 OTHErs
VS
MANAGING DIRECTOR, OIL & GAS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, BLUE AREA, ISLAMABAD AND 10 OTHERS
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Constitution of Pakistan, 1973-- ----Art. 199--Appointment as supervisor--Regularization from back date--Benefit of regularization--Doctrine of past and closed transaction--Contractual employees No. 2 to 11 were appointed higher to petitioners, as Junior Engineers in year 2007 and later on their services were regularized, even otherwise all these respondents are qualified engineering graduates, whereas, petitioners are only diploma holders and there is a mark difference in their qualifications, in result whereof, Respondents No. 2 to 4 were appointed in EG-IV and later on promoted to EG-V, whereas, Respondents No, 5 to 11 were appointed in EG-III--Competent authority has rightly dealt with question of regularization of services of private respondents, which could not be assailed at this stage by petitioners, as case of such employees would be hit by doctrine of past and closed transaction and same could not be reopened, in any manner No. 2 to 11 were contractual employees, who were given regularization from date of their initial appointment made in meeting of respondent Board, even otherwise, Managing Director is authorized to regularize contract employees up to EG-V, as and when they have completed one year contractual service and meet criteria referred in Rules and it is not case of petitioners that Respondents No. 2 to 11 are not fit for purpose of promotion--Petition dismissed. JUDGMENT Through this writ petition, petitioners have prayed for following relief: “It is respectfully prayed that the instant writ petition may graciously be accepted and a writ may kindly be issued by declaring the impugned order dated 06,01.2017 as illegal and unlawful and be set aside and in consequence thereof, the respondent organization may kindly be directed to treat the petitioners in Executive Group-Ill w.e.f. 01.07,2003 and in EG-IV w.e.f. 01.07.2008 and the respondent organization may also kindly be directed to consider the petitioners for promotion in EG-V w.e.f, 01.07.2013, with all consequential back benefits, as per promotion criteria (i.e. minimum 05 years service with good record in next below cadre) in the interest of justice. It is also prayed that during the…
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