Case Details

Citation(s)
1996 SLG 677 1996 SLD 677 1996 PLC 740
Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad
Appeal No. 261(R) of 1995, heard on 3rd September, 1995
NOOR MUHAMMAD MAGSI, AFTAB AHMAD AND MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, 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

SIKANDER AQEEL ANSARI

VS

SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, ISLAMABAD and 14 others SIKANDER AQEEL ANSARI Vs SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, ISLAMABAD and 14 others

Law:

Section:

Civil service--- ----Promotion---Entitlement---Civil servant was directly recruited through Central Superior Services (C. S. S.) and was appointed as an Officer. in a department in BPS-17 prior in time to co-civil servants who were promoted from ministerial staff of the same Department through departmental examination--­Civil servant prior to joining department, served as Civil Judge in BPS-17 ---Co-­civil servants who were promoted from Ministerial Staff of Department later on were promoted to BPS-18, but civil servant who was direct promotee was not considered for such promotion despite he was appointed one year prior to co-civil servants on ground that he did not fulfil requirement of length of service coupled with seniority which was basic precondition for consideration for promotion to next higher post---Minimum length of service required for promotion to BPS-18 was five years' service in BPS-17 and co-civil servants though were promoted to BPS-17 subsequent to direct recruitment of civil servant, but they had fulfilled requirement of length of service as they were already serving since long in Department in BPS-17---Services rendered by civil servant in his previous department as a Civil Judge, could not be counted towards seniority in new post/cadre or group---Civil servant, thus, though was directly recruited one year prior to co-civil servant in department, was not senior to his batch and his service in department was less than length of service required for promotion to BPS-18 and benefit of his previous service in a different department could not be extended to him whereby he could supersede senior officers of his batch ---Co-civil servants, thus, were rightly promoted to BPS-18, and civil servant should have waited for maturity of his seniority in Department to be eligible for consideration for promotion in BPS-18. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN (MEMBER).---The present appeal is an off-shoot of a long-standing dispute between two categories of Section Officers of the Office Management Group. The one category who is presently represented by the appellant or the direct recruitees of the OMG through CSS Examination conducted by the Federal Public Service…
🔒
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