| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1998 SLG 817 1998 SLD 817 1998 SCMR 2026 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 963 of 1994, .decided on 4-06-1998 (On appeal against the judgment dated 20-5-1993 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Camp at Lahore in Appeal No. 143(L) of 1990)
AJMAL MIAN, C.J., SH. RIAZ AHMAD AND CH. MUHAMMAD ARIF, JJ
Hafiz Tariq Nasim, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellant. M. Saleem Chaudhry, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for
Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 963 of 1994, .decided on 4-06-1998 (On appeal against the judgment dated 20-5-1993 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Camp at Lahore in Appeal No. 143(L) of 1990)
AJMAL MIAN, C.J., SH. RIAZ AHMAD AND CH. MUHAMMAD ARIF, JJ
Hafiz Tariq Nasim, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellant. M. Saleem Chaudhry, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for
Respondents
NAZIR AHMAD
VS
THE CHIEF ENGINEER (ADMN.) (WATER), WAPDA and 43 others
Law:
Section:
Civil service--Pro forma promotion---Initial appointment of employee on work-charge basis cannot operate as a bar to the case of the employee for conferment of pro forma promotion---Employee, after initial appointment was transferred to the other company and after its winding up services of said employee were repatriated subject to the condition that he will be considered for pro forma promotion without financial benefits with retrospective effect by the Selection Board provided he fulfilled the qualifications and the criteria prescribed by Department in relevant Service Rules etc. and subject to the passing of an examination if so prescribed---Employee having been appointed as far back as November, 1972 and was repatriated in 1987 and was working till date, his services could not. by any stretch of imagination, be considered as same on work-charge basis-Employee, therefore, would be presumed to have been absorbed and, therefore was entitled to be considered for pro forma promotion---Authority was directed by Supreme Court to reconsider the case of employee for pro forma promotion JUDGMENT SH. RIAZ AHMAD, J.---This appeal through leave of this Court is directed against the judgment and order dated 20-5-1993 whereby it was held that the appellant who had initially been appointed on work-charge basis, on repatriation to WAPDA could not claim pro forma promotion because such pro forma promotion could only be given to the regular employees. 2. The facts giving rise to the institution of this appeal in brief are that the appellant was employed by the respondent WAPDA in Machinery Pool Organisation as Junior Research Officer on work-charge basis for the duration of a specific project of Sargodha Airfield Work with headquarters at Faisalabad. The terms and conditions contained in the letter of appointment are reproduced hereunder:-- "Mr. Nazir Ahmad son of Ahmad Hassan is hereby appointed as Junior Officer (Testing and Progress) as work-charged contract at Rs.500 per mensum in the scale of Rs.400--1,000 for duration of Sargodha Air Field work M.P.O. with the Headquarters at Workshop, Lyallpur. His services shall stand terminated on the completion of above work or'…
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