| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2022 SLG 1673 2022 SLD 1673 2022 PLJ 61 |
Peshawar High Court
S.A. No. 06-P of 2021, decided on 18.12.2021.
IJAZ ANWAR AND SYED MUHAMMAD ATTIQUE SHAH, JJ.
M/s. Hamid Ali Shah, Advocate and Barrister Syed Mudassir Ameer, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. Khalid Rehman, AAG alongwith Syed Shakir Hussain Shah, Litigation Assistant, Peshawar High Court, Peshawar for
Respondents. In person for
Respondents (No. 4, 9 an
S.A. No. 06-P of 2021, decided on 18.12.2021.
IJAZ ANWAR AND SYED MUHAMMAD ATTIQUE SHAH, JJ.
M/s. Hamid Ali Shah, Advocate and Barrister Syed Mudassir Ameer, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. Khalid Rehman, AAG alongwith Syed Shakir Hussain Shah, Litigation Assistant, Peshawar High Court, Peshawar for
Respondents. In person for
Respondents (No. 4, 9 an
KALIM ARSHAD KHAN---AppellantVSPESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR through Registrar and others
Law: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1989
Section: 8(3)
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Civil Servants Act, 1973 (XVIII of1973)-- ----S. 8(3)--Khyber Pakthunkhwa Civil Servants Rules, 2001, R. 5(c)(ii) , 10(a)--Appointment as Additional District , Sessions Judge vide order of High Court, 2005--Batch-mates of appellant were appointed in 2001--Appointment on same selection process--Entitlement for seniority--Determination of seniority--Disputed seniority list--Deprivation from seniority--Challenge to--Appeal of appellant before this Tribunal is within time against final letter dated 13.03.2021--Four Judicial Officers were appointed vide Notification dated 28.08.2001, depriving him of his appointment, while this process was held by Division Bench of Hon’ble Peshawar High Court as violative of his rights and specific direction for his appointment was issued--Appointment orders were issued belatedly will not deprive appellant of his seniority particularly when Division Bench of Hon’ble Peshawar High Court has raised eyebrow on selection process appointed in later selection, prior to appointment of appellant, have no right whatsoever to claim seniority over appellant--This Tribunal finds that appellant has not been assigned his correct seniority alongwith his batch-mates, thus, mere fact that he was appointed vide order dated 22.02.2005 would not deprive him of his seniority in terms of Rule 5(c)(ii) read with Rule 10 of “the Rules”--Tribunal holds that appellant be assigned seniority with effect from date, his batch-mates of same selection process were appointed--Appeal allowed. Ref. 2002 SCMR 889, 1993 PLC (C.S.) 1188. JUDGMENT Ijaz Anwar, J.--This appeal has been filed under Section 5 of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Subordinate Judiciary Service Tribunal Act, 1991 against the letter Bearing No. 3784/Admn dated 13.03.2021 issued by the Registrar, Peshawar High Court, Peshawar, whereby, appellant was conveyed the decision of the Hon’ble Administration Committee regretting his application/departmental appeal for fixation of seniority amongst his batch-mates. 2. In essence, initially appellant was appointed against the post of Additional District , Sessions Judge vide Notification dated 22.02.2005, pursuant to the judgment of the Hon’ble…
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