| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1994 SLG 381 1994 SLD 381 1994 PLD 233 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 367-K of 1992, decision dated: 1stDecember, 1993. (On appeal from judgment dated 12-2-1992passed by Sindh Service Tribunal in Appeal No. 103/1991).
AJMAL MIAN, SAJJAD ALI SHAH AND SALEEM AKTHAR, JJ
Syed Oamar-ud-Din Ahmed, Advocate Supreme Court and Ahmedullah Faruqui, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant.S.M. Abbas, Advocate-on-Record
Civil Appeal No. 367-K of 1992, decision dated: 1stDecember, 1993. (On appeal from judgment dated 12-2-1992passed by Sindh Service Tribunal in Appeal No. 103/1991).
AJMAL MIAN, SAJJAD ALI SHAH AND SALEEM AKTHAR, JJ
Syed Oamar-ud-Din Ahmed, Advocate Supreme Court and Ahmedullah Faruqui, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant.S.M. Abbas, Advocate-on-Record
SARWAR ALI KHANvsCHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF SINDHand another
Law: Sindh Service Tribunal Act, 1974
Section: 4
(a) Sindh Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973)------S. 4---Dismissal of civil servant's appeal as time-barred---Civil servant's appointment to higher post on his own pay and status---Civil servant's entitlement for salary of the higher post---Civil servant's failure to challenge notification whereby he was appointed to higher post in his own pay and status---Effect---Civil servant's appointment to higher post was although temporary arrangement, yet it lasted for three years---Filing representation;, was also proper remedy and in such circumstances, knocking down service appeal as time-barred on ground that notification of specified date was not challenged would not be fair---Dismissal of civil servant's appeal on such ground was, thus, not warranted.(b) Sindh Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973)------S. 4---Dismissal of service appeal on ground that regular promotion at initial stage being not possible without clearance by Selection Board, civil servant's claim to that effect was not warranted---Validity---When recruitment Rules were notified on specified date civil servant stood qualified as having done five years' service in the higher grade with no adverse report, therefore, Departmental Promotion Committee could have approved civil servant on that specified date; there was no legal justification for getting clearance late and promoting him on regular basis on a subsequent date---Civil servant's promotion on regular basis from a date subsequent to the one he was entitled to be promoted in absence of plausible explanation, could not be treated as fair and equitable---Dismissal of civil servant's claim on that basis, was thus not warranted.(c) Civil service------Promotion---Claim to salary of higher post---Civil servant's promotion was although a temporary arrangement, yet it lasted for three years and there being no impediment in his way to be promoted at that time, on regular basis and he being eligible and qualified for promotion to higher grade, there was no justification to deprive him of the salary and other benefits of that post---Civil servant. having discharged full duties and responsibilities of the higher post; in absence of plausible reason, he could…