Case Details

Citation(s)
1981 SLG 1374 1981 SLD 1374 1981 PLC 25
Service Tribunal, Punjab
Appeals Nos. 88/398, 304/393, 305/301, 306, 311 /306, 312/360, 313/311, 30. 321 and 374/309 of 1977, decision dated: 15-09-1979.
M. SALEEM CHAUDHARY, CHAIRMAN, MAZHAR MUNIR AND S. HAFEEZURREHMAN, MEMBERS

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

AHMAD DIN and others

VS

THE PROVINCE OF PUNJAB

Law:

Section:

Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974)--- --- Ss. 2 & 4--Candidate Kanungo, Naib-Tehsildar or Tehsildar completing training but not yet notified as appointed to service-Not Civil servants nor entitled to appeal before Tribunal. Province of Punjab v. Muhammad Sharif P L D 1959 S C (Pak.) 61 rel. ORDER M. SALEEM CHAUDHURY (CHAIRMAN).-In these ten appeals the appellants who were selected as Tehsildars/Kanungo candidates are aggrieved by the order of the Competent Authority terminating their service. The learned Government Pleader has raised a preliminary objection that the appeals are incompetent inasmuch as the appellants cannot be treated to be civil servants as defined by the Punjab Service Tribunals Act of 1974. According to the learned Government Pleader the appellants, who were merely selected as candidates KanungoJNaib-Tehsildars/Tehsildars, were never appointed as such and had not yet become the members of any service under the Punjab Province nor they could be deemed to have held any civil post in connection with the affairs of the Province of Punjab. Relying upon the definition of the civil servant contained in the Punjab Service Tribunal Act, the learned Government Pleader contended that "a candidate" was not the holder of a civil, post in connection with the affairs of the Province. He relied upon Province of Punjab v, Muhammad Sharif (P L D 1959 S C (Pak.) 61), in this behalf. Reliance was placed, in particular, on the following observations: "In view of our findings on the facts of this case that the Respondents did not go beyond the stage of an accepted "Candidate Ziladars", when he was discharged, he cannot be said to be holding a civil post in Pakistan at the time of his discharge and so, therefore, is not entitled to the protection under section 240, subsection (3) of the Government of India Act." The appellants endeavoured to meet the objection by pointing out that they were selected by the Collector/Commissioner/Board of Revenue for appoint­ment as Kanungo/Naib-Tehsildar/Tehsildar respectively. They completLd the prescribed training period and after the completion of training, they were not to undergo any further test or selection. The…
🔒
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