Case Details

Citation(s)
1958 SLG 134 1958 SLD 134 1958 PLD 370
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 437 of 1956, decided on 19th February 1958 under Article 170 of the Constitution. dates of hearing: 13th, 18th, 19th, 20th, 24th, 25th September 1957 and 1st October 1957
B. Z. KAIKAUS AND AKHLAQUE HUSSAIN, JJ
Assistant to the Legal Advisor of the Corporation of the City of Lahore-
Respondents. Sardar Muhammad Iqbal for Petitioner. M. Inayat Ullah and M. Mushtaq Ahmad for
Respondents. Mir Bashir Ahmad in person (
Respondent No. 4)

MAHBOOB ALI MALIK

VS

(1) CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF Lahore. (2) COMMISSIONER, Lahore DIVISION, Lahore, (3) CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF Lahore AND (4) MIR BASHIR AHMAD,

Law:

Section:

(a) Words & Phrases--- "Promotion"-Meaning-Appointment to a higher post in the same line. Although the word `promotion' is not defined anywhere, it means the taking of a further step on a ladder. It is only where an employee after having gained experience in a particular post or having otherwise better qualified himself is appointed, to apt which is regarded as a higher post in that particular line that it is called promotion. If a Sub-Inspector were appointed an Executive Engineer, it will hardly be regarded as a promotion, although there may be a vast difference between the salaries which the two posts carry. The fixation of a line of promotion depends entirely on the employer and if he provides that experience for one post will qualify for another it is not for any other person to say that the two posts are not in the same line of promotion. (b) City of Lahore Corporation Bye-laws, Bye-laws 9 & 10­--- Bye-law 10 enjoining paying of due regard to seniority in matters of promotion, inapplicable to appointments made after advertisement under Bye-law 9 (2). Held, that for promotion all employees of the Corporation have been placed in the same group, but that a case where appoint­ment is made under Bye-law 9 (2) after inviting applications from outsiders is not a case of "promotion", and Bye-law 10 which enjoined paying of due regard to seniority in matters of promotion was therefore not attracted in such a case. (c) City of Lahore Corporation Bye-laws, Bye-law 10---- Enjoins only due regard; not that the senior person should necessarily be appointed. Held, that Bye-law 10 only enjoins due regard. It does not force the Corporation to appoint the person who is senior. (d) City of Lahore Corporation Act (XV of 1941), S. 392­---Commissioner's order directing that instead of A, B should be appointed to a post-Illegal. Where the Commissioner was not making a recommendation but was giving a direction by his order for the appointment of B instead of A to a post in the purported exercise of his powers under section 392 of the City of Lahore Corporation Act (XV of 1941) Held, that the order was illegal. (e) City of Lahore Corporation Act (XV of 1941), S.…
🔒
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