Case Details

Citation(s)
1980 SLG 1503 1980 SLD 1503 1980 PLC 614
Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad
Appeal No. 234(L) of 1975.
N. A. CHOUDHURY, MEMBER

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

RIAZUDDIN CHAUDHARI

VS

MINISTRY OF FINANCE AND OTHERS

Law:

Section:

Civil service- -- Seniority-Appellant a Stenographer in office of Director, Audit & Accounts, transferred to office of Auditor-General as Stenographer and on being granted selection grade claiming seniority over respondents allegedly appointed later than appellant-Appellant, treated as a `direct appointee' and given seniority in Auditor-General's Office from date of recruitment and then promoted to selection grade post of steno­grapher-Appellant, held, a direct recruit appointed through method of nomination/selection in absence of recruitment rules and takes seniority among stenographers from date of appointment, in circum­stances. ORDER This is an appeal filed by Mr. Riazuddin Chaudhri, a Selection Grade Stenographer, for restoration of his seniority. While working as Steno in the office of the Director, Audit and Accounts, the appellant was transferred on 17-7-64 to the office of the Auditor-General, as a Stenographer. He was given the selection grade w. e. f. 10-12-68. The Auditor-General issued a seniority list of the existing Stenographers and the appellant was placed at third position. The names of the respondents did not appear in the list as they were not physically hold­ing any post in the office (Annex. `C'). Another seniority list was issued by the Auditor-General, whereby the appellant was placed at S. No. 3, while the respondents at S. Nos. 3 to 8 according to the date of assignment of each individual (Annexure `D'). On the basis of this list, the appellant was confirmed as Stenographer w. e. f. 17-7-64, and then as Selection Grade Stenographer on 10-12-68. On 31-8-72, the Auditor-General issued a revised seniority list and the appellant was placed junior to the respondents 3 to 5 (Annexure `G'). The appellant has, therefore, contended that since the respondents joined much later than the appellant, the fixation of the seniority of the respondents over the appellant, is void and illegal. He has, therefore, requested to declare him senior to the respondents Nos. 3 to 5. The learned counsel for State argued that the appellant belonged to the office of the Director, Audit & Accounts works, and was transferred to the Auditor-General in a surely…
🔒
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