Case Details

Citation(s)
1985 SLG 2241 1985 SLD 2241 1985 PLC 915
Service Tribunal, Punjab
Case No. 138/614 of 1983, decided on 24th June, 1984.
S. ABDUL, JABBAR KHAN, CHAIRMAN AND ABDUL HAMID CHAUDHRY, 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

Ch. MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN

VS

SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, SCARP-II CIRCLE, SARGODHA AND 2 OTHERS

Law:

Section:

Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974)- --S. 4-Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 5-Appeal before Tribunal -Limitation-Condonation of delay - Justification-Appellant challenging adverse remarks-Appeal filed about 4 years after rejection of representation by competent authority - Explanation for delay that result of a criminal case against appellant was being awaited-­Such criminal case neither referred to in comments of reporting officer nor relevant to impugned remarks-Application for condonation of delay, in circumstances, rejected. Masud Ahmad Riaz for Appellant. A. G. Humayun, District Attorney for Respondents. JUDGMENT S. ABDUL JABBAR KHAN, (CHAIRMAN).-Ch. Muhammad Hussain, S.D.O./Assistant Engineer, Bhalwal Irrigation Workshop, Bhalwal, has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, in which he has impleaded the Superintending Engineer SCARP-II Circle Sargodha, Chief Engineer. Irrigation, Sargodha Region, Sargodha and Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Irrigation and Power Depart­ment, Lahore, as respondents. 2. By virtue of this appeal he has prayed that the adverse remarks as contained in letter, dated 28th July, 1979, may be expunged and the final orders, dated 8tb January, 1981 and 14th March, 1981, be set aside. 3. Brief facts of the case are that vide letter, dated 28th July, 1979, the appellant was conveyed adverse remarks for the period from 8th June, 1978 io 31st December, 1978. He filed a representation and respon­dent No. 2 asked the respondent No. 1 to justify his remarks vis-a-vis the facts and figures given by the appellant to repudiate the various remarks. The respondent No. 1 frankly conceded in his letter, dated 21st October, 1979, that the remarks given by the Repbrting Officer were incorrect and were liable to be ignored in view of the above-mentioned actual position. He further recommended that all the remarks be expunged. However, in spite of that the appellant's aforesaid representation was rejected vide letter, dated 8th January, 1981 to 14th March, 1981. Hence this appeal. 4. We have beard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned District Attorney assisted by the representative…
🔒
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