| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 1388 2021 SLD 1388 2021 SCMR 855 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 931 of 2020, decided on 1st February, 2021, Date of hearing: 1st February, 2021. (Against the judgment Dated 8.9.2015, passed by the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Service Tribunal, Peshawar, in Appeal No. 1681 of 2011)
IJAZ UL AHSAN, JUSTICE, SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, JUSTICE
Amjad Ali (Mardan), Advocate Supreme Court (via video link from Peshawar) and Haji Muhammad Zahir, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellant. Zahid Yousaf Qureshi, Addl. A.G., Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for
Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 931 of 2020, decided on 1st February, 2021, Date of hearing: 1st February, 2021. (Against the judgment Dated 8.9.2015, passed by the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Service Tribunal, Peshawar, in Appeal No. 1681 of 2011)
IJAZ UL AHSAN, JUSTICE, SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, JUSTICE
Amjad Ali (Mardan), Advocate Supreme Court (via video link from Peshawar) and Haji Muhammad Zahir, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellant. Zahid Yousaf Qureshi, Addl. A.G., Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for
Respondents.
WALI JAN
VS
GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA THROUGH SECRETARY AGRICULTURE, LIVESTOCK COOPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, PESHAWAR AND OTHERS
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 187(1),212(3)
Constitution of Pakistan--- ----Arts. 187(1) 212(3)---Service appeal before the Supreme Court---Scope---Party (civil servant) had no right to raise an absolutely new plea before the Supreme Court and seek a decision on it, nor could such plea be allowed to be raised as a matter of course or right on the pretext of doing complete justice---Besides, the Supreme Court in its appellate jurisdiction would not generally determine a question of fact that had not been pleaded or raised by the party in the lower forum. Sarhad Development Authority N.W.F.P. (Now KPK) v. Nawab Ali Khan 2020 SCMR 265 ref. ORDER GULZAR AHMED, C.J.--- The service appeal filed by the appellant in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Service Tribunal, Peshawar (the Tribunal) was dismissed by the impugned judgment dated 08.09.2015. The operative part of which is as follows: 7. From perusal of the record it transpired that at the time of consideration for promotion anti-corruption proceedings for two different cases Nos.191 of 2001 and 29 of 2002 were pending adjudication in the Court of Special Judge Anti-corruption which were decided on 14.10.2003 and 26.02.2004 respectively and appellant was acquitted on the benefit of doubt. The deferment of the appellant on the relevant time was thus in accordance with the provision as contained in the promotion policy of the Provincial Government. Moreso, the appellant failed to agitate his deferment in time but took up the matter on 12.05.2011 after abnormal delay of almost 9 years. It is also ironical to observe that assessment of suitability and fitness for the higher post is a pre-requisite for promotion, it entails assumption of higher responsibilities and actualization of charge in the higher post which is not possible under the existing law/rules on promotion. The prayer of the appellant for promotion to the higher post after a long time of his retirement carries no weight and cannot be entertained.…
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