| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1990 SLG 471 1990 SLD 471 1990 SCMR 137 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 28 of 1986, decision dated: 27-05-1989.
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, JAVID IQBAL AND USMAN ALI SHAH, JJ
M. Sadiq Abbasi, Advocate Supreme Court with Ch. M. Anwar, Deputy Director, WAPDA and Khan lmtiaz Mohammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants. Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 28 of 1986, decision dated: 27-05-1989.
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, JAVID IQBAL AND USMAN ALI SHAH, JJ
M. Sadiq Abbasi, Advocate Supreme Court with Ch. M. Anwar, Deputy Director, WAPDA and Khan lmtiaz Mohammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants. Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent.
WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY and another
VS
GHULAM MUSTAFA-
Law:
Section:
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-----Art.212(3)---Promotion---Fixation of seniority---Civil servant was initially promoted but on the basis of some representation of other employees that they were senior to him, order of promotion was reversed and civil servant was reverted---Civil servant's appeal against his reversion was accepted on the ground t he should have been heard before his order of promotion was reversed--Order of promotion clearly indicated that promotion was provisional and on a purely temporary basis and that the promotion was liable to reversion on account inter alia, of wrong fixation of his seniority, without any notice to him---Plea, that in the face of such a conditional promotion, civil servant could not feel aggrieved by the order of his reversion, as his promotion was made on an errorneous view of his true seniority; required further consideration---Leave to appeal was granted to consider such plea.--[Civil service]. (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-- --Art. 212(3)---Promotion---Fixation of seniority---Some factual assumptions having been made on the submissions made from the appellant Authority's side and possibility was that civil servant might have made submissions, if duly heard by the concerned authority with a view to correct or rebut the pleas raised from appellant Authority's side---Service Tribunal should thus have remanded the case for proceeding in accordance with law after hearing the civil servant---Appellant Authority's suggestion that opportunity of hearing even now could be afforded to civil servant and in case the previous orders impugned before Tribunal were upheld, the intervening arrangements and actions would not be disturbed--Supreme Court while disposing of appeal, directed that the concerned authority would pass fresh orders in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to civil servant and other concerned persons---In case earlier impugned orders before Service Tribunal were upheld, the departmental actions/arrangements and other orders passed in the meanwhile, would have effect accordingly---If however orders impugned before Tribunal were not upheld and different orders were passed, the…
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