Case Details

Citation(s)
1985 SLG 1897 1985 SLD 1897 1985 PLC 498
Service Tribunal, Punjab
Case No. 369/1003 of 1984, decided on 24th February, 1985.
S. ABDUL, JABBAR KHAN, CHAIRMAN, ABDUL HAMID CHAUDHRY AND MIAN FAIZ KARIM, 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

MAJID HUSSAIN REHMANI

VS

SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, COMMUNICATION AND WORKS DEPARTMENT, LAHORE

Law:

Section:

Civil service-- --- Adverse remarks--Fundamental principle--Consistency should always prevail in matter of recording of A. C. R.--Reporting Officer or countersigning authority should not be inconsistent in their opinion in the same breath--Person considered "a good personality" in specified column of A. C. R.--Declaring such person in pen-picture by same Reporting Officer as "unimpressive", held, not justified--Reporting Officer describing personal work of reported Officer in specified column as "good", held, cannot controvert his own remarks while writing pen-­picture--Inconsistent remarks directed by Service Tribunal to be expugned--Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), S.4. Masud Ahmad Riaz for Appellant. A.G. Humayun, District Attorney for Respondents. JUDGMENT S. ABDUL JABBAR KHAN (CHAIRMAN).-- Majid Hussain Rehmani, Director Roads, Lahore Development Authority, Lahore, has-filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, in which he has impleaded the Government of Punjab through Secretary, Communication and Works Department, Lahore and the Secretary Communication and Works Department, Government of the Punjab, Lahore as respondents. 2. By virtue of this appeal he has prayed the adverse report pertaining to the period from 1-7-1979 to 31-10-1979, be expunged as being unjustified. 3. Brief facts of the case are that Mr., Saleem Akhtar Bhalli, Superintending Engineer, recorded adverse opinion about the appellant by holding as under:- "1. Control over quality of work: Below average. 2. Did not impress me at all." These remarks were communicated to him on 7-5-1980, which was received by him on 19-5-1980. The appellant made a representation against the adverse remarks through letter dated 17-6-1980 but the same was not disposed of till February, 1984, when he sent a reminder dated 16-2-1984. In response to the said reminder he has now been informed vide letter, dated 10-4-1984, that his representation had been considered and rejected vide Government letter No.6 R.A. (C & W) 2/9/80, dated 30-9-1980. Hence this appeal. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned District Attorney and have perused 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