| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1991 SLG 1803 1991 SLD 1803 1991 PLC 1 |
Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad
Appeal No. 11(L) of 1987, decided on 20th May, 1990.
ABDUL, JALIL AND CH. HASSAN NAWAZ, MEMBERS
Ch. Mushtaq Masood for Appellant. Sardar Amir Akbar Khan with Sarshar Ahmed, Dy. Director, D.R. for
Respondents.
Appeal No. 11(L) of 1987, decided on 20th May, 1990.
ABDUL, JALIL AND CH. HASSAN NAWAZ, MEMBERS
Ch. Mushtaq Masood for Appellant. Sardar Amir Akbar Khan with Sarshar Ahmed, Dy. Director, D.R. for
Respondents.
Ch. SAEED AHMAD
VS
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, FINANCE DIVISION and 4 others Ch. SAEED AHMAD vs SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, FINANCE DIVISION and 4 others
Law:
Section:
(a) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)---- ---S. 4(1)(b) ---Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973), S.9 ---Promotion---Appellant, an Assistant Director, National Savings Organization (BPS-17), was appointed as Deputy Director (BPS-18) on recommendation of Federal Public Service Commission but his case for promotion to Grade-19 was not approved by Federal Selection Board on basis of his record and respondents who were junior to him in line were approved and recommended for promotion and their promotion to Grade-19 was ordered by competent Authority---Appellant protesting against it and praying for cancellation of notification by which his juniors were promoted-- Admitted fact was that appellant's case was duly considered by Federal Selection Board and he was not approved for promotion whereas respondents who were junior to appellant were approved for promotion and orders of their promotion were issued by impugned notification ---Supersession was result of a finding arrived at by competent Authority, on basis of deliberations of Selection Beard to the effect that appellant was not found fit to be promoted to a higher grade-- Record showed that appellant was not entitled to relief asked for and nobody acted against him with any malice as alleged by him and departmental actions having a bearing on question of his promotion were all done in accordance with law ---Officers concerned had no grudge or ill-will against him as they were not affected by his promotion in any way ---- determination of question of promotion of appellant by competent Authority could not be called in question appeal before Service Tribunal---Appeal being barred by S. 4(1)(a) of Service Tribunals Act was dismissed. (b) Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973)-- ---S. 9---Promotion---Eligibility---Mere eligibility to promotion does not entitle a person to promotion when a civil servant did not have vested right to be considered for promotion on a particular date, unless it was established that his juniors were considered for promotion or any person was taken on that post in disregard of his right or in violation of prevalent rules of recruitment/promotion. (c) Mala fides-- ---Meaning---How to prove mala…
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