Case Details

Citation(s)
1993 SLG 1606 1993 SLD 1606 1993 PLC 986
Supreme Court (AJ&K)
Civil Appeal No. 44 of 1992, decided on 2nd March, 1993.
SARDAR SAID MUHAMMAD KHAN, C.J. AND BASHARAT AHMAD SHAIKH, J

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

MUHAMMAD BASHIR KHAN and another

VS

INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE, MUZAFFARABAD and 4 others

Law:

Section:

(On appeal from the of the Service Tribunal dated 27-7-1992 in Service Appeal No. 467 of 1989). (a) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Service Tribunal Act, 1975---- ----S. 4(1), Proviso (b)---Jurisdiction of Service Tribunal---Bar contained in S.4(1), proviso (b), Azad Jammu and Kashmir Service Tribunal Act, 1975, that no appeal would he to Service Tribunal against an order or decision determining the fitness or otherwise of a person to be promoted to a higher grade would be applicable only to a case in which a decision or order had been passed to the effect that a particular person was not fit for promotion---Bar to file appeal would not, however, extend to a case where fitness had not been examined at all; appeal would be competent in such cases. Mrs. M.N. Arshad v. Miss Naeema Khan PLD 1990 SC 612 rel. (b) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Service Tribunal Act, 1975--- ----S. 4(1)---Azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Servants Act, 1976, S. 21(2), proviso---Appeal before Service Tribunal Filed without availing remedy of departmental representation/appeal---Competency---Proviso to S. 21(2), Azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Servants Act bars filing of a representation only in respect of matters relating to the determination of fitness---Civil servants had not challenged any order or decision by which they had been found unsuitable to be selected for promotion: their claim was that a right had vested in them on the basis of the claims put forward by them that they should have been considered for selection to the higher posts---Where a person had not been considered at all and his fitness had not been determined, he was not covered by the mischief of proviso to S. 21(2), Civil Servants Act---Civil servants, thus, could file representation against the order in question---Civil servants having not availed of the departmental remedy were debarred from filing appeals before Service Tribunal---Order of Service Tribunal, whereby civil servants' appeal was dismissed for lack of filing departmental representation/appeal was valid in circumstances. Azad Government of the State of J&K v. Muhammad Rafique 1993 PLC (C.S.) 286 ref. Sardar Rafique Mahmood Khan for Appellants. Sardar Khan, A. -G. for…
🔒
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