| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1993 SLG 1211 1993 SLD 1211 1993 PLC 210 |
Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad
Appeal No. 175(R) of 1992, heard on 28th October, 1992.
ABDUL RAZZAQ A. THAHIM, CHAIRMAN, S.M. ISHAQ AND CH. HASAN NAWAZ MEMBERS
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Appeal No. 175(R) of 1992, heard on 28th October, 1992.
ABDUL RAZZAQ A. THAHIM, CHAIRMAN, S.M. ISHAQ AND CH. HASAN NAWAZ MEMBERS
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
MINHAJUL HASSAN SYED
VS
Law:
Section:
Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)--- ----S.4--Appeal---Competency---Filing of departmental appeal/representation against the order impugned was prerequisite for filing appeal before Service Tribunal---Departmental appeal/representation against impunged order having not been filed, appeal before Service Tribunal was not competent. (b) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)--- ----S. 4--Appeal---Jurisdiction of Service Tribunal---Promotion Policy being the prerogative of the department concerned, Service Tribunal had no jurisdiction to examine its merits or demerits. (c) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)--- ----S. 4---Appeal against orders of promotion---Jurisdiction of Tribunal---Civil servant's case was considered and he was found unfit for promotion---Service Tribunal had no jurisdiction to question findings of Selection Board---Bar of jurisdiction impugned by SA(1)(b), Service Tribunals Act, 1973, was equally applicable to civil servant's prayer in appeal where he had sought direction that persons illegally appointed by promotion on acting charge basis be replaced by duly qualified persons fit for promotion. (d) Civil service--- ----Promotion---Mode of examining civil servant's annual performance evaluation reports---Competent Authority had taken up five years reports of civil servant, immediately preceding Selection Board's meeting and rated him "average" all in one go on the same date---Such method by no means reflected objective assessment of civil servant's performance during those years---Proper course was to put up each year's report on completion before Chairman for his re marks and then in case of "average" rating to have conveyed it to civil servant to give him opportunity of improving his performance---Method of evaluation adopted in civil servant's case prejudiced his case, for it was only on account of such average rating by competent Authority, that his (civil servant's) quantification was relegated to a lower position. (e) Civil service--- ---- Promotion---Civil servant found to be unfit for promotion without recording reasons---Reasons should have been given where civil servant was found to be unfit for promotion, to advance interests of…
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