| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1987 SLG 1034 1987 SLD 1034 1987 PLC 168 |
Service Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. 90 of 1984, decided on 28th July, 1986.
MUNAWAR ALI KHAN, CHAIRMAN
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Appeal No. 90 of 1984, decided on 28th July, 1986.
MUNAWAR ALI KHAN, CHAIRMAN
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
ABDUL SATTAR SOOMRO
VS
CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF SIND and 15 others
Law:
Section:
Sind Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973)-- ---S. 4, proviso (b)--Sind Civil Servants (Probation, Confirmation and Seniority) Rules, 1975, Rr. 10, 11 (b) & 13--Promotion--Seniority on promotion--Civil servant admittedly not found fit for promotion and superseded--Seniority, held, was rightly reckoned from date of subsequent promotion of civil servant--Claim for benefit of seniority in lower grade on promotion to higher post, held, was rightly rejected-Tribunal has no power to call upon relevant authorities to justify their plea that appellant was not found fit for promotion because it would amount to holding an enquiry as to fitness or otherwise for purpose of promotion which was not within jurisdiction of Tribunal. Rauf Ahmad v. Secretary to Government of Punjab, Communication and Works Department 1984 P L C (C.S.) 287; Nawazish Hussain v. Director-General, Pakistan P. W.D., Islamabad 1984 P L C (C.S.) 1610 and Federal Service Tribunal and Inspector-General of Police v. Ashfaq Ahmad and another 1983 S C M R 34 held not applicable. Usman Ghani Rashid for Appellant. Abdul Ghafoor Mangi, A. A.-G. for the State. Date of hearing: 24th July, 1986. JUDGMENT The appellant Abdus Sattar was promoted to the post of Additional District Judge by Notification dated 24-5-1980. However, two batches of Senior Civil Judges one comprising respondents Nos. 4 to 7 and another comprising rest of the private respondents who were all junior to him were promoted before him in 1978 and 1979 respectively. On both the occasions the appellant claims to have made representations against his supersesion but with no result. As his seniority vis-a-vis that of the above respondents in the cadre of Additional District Judges has been adversely affected, he has come in. this appeal. The appellant has made the following prayer for: "(a) A declaration that the appellant is senior to respondents Nos.4 to 16. (b) A direction to respondents Nos.1 to 3 that the appellant may be assigned his due seniority with retrospective effect. (c) Cost of the case. (d) Any other appropriate order." 2. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties the appeal was dismissed by short order…
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