Law:

Section:

Sindh Civil Servants (Probation, Confirmation and Seniority) Rules, 1975-------Rr. 9, 10 & 11---Sindh Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1974, R.5---Sindh Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973), S.4---Seniority and promotion---Determination of---Civil 'servants despite having been appointed as Junior Clerks earlier than co-civil servants, their seniority as senior clerk was determined below to co-civil servants--­Seniority was determined by Departmental Promotion Committee which was not constituted according to law---Neither recruitment rules had been framed for filling up posts nor seniority list of junior clerks was prepared at the time of promotion---Undue haste, favouritism and use of excessive authority was manifest from action of Authority concerned---Such act of Authority was not only mala fides, but bad in the eyes of law and could not legitimately sustain---Policy of promotion made it mandatory on the part of Competent Authority to have prepared seniority list of all civil servants appointed as Junior Clerks on respective dates and such list should have been circulated to all concerned and objections, if any, should have been appropriately addressed---Promotions as senior clerks, thereafter, should have been held on basis of seniority-cum-fitness principle, but that important codal formalities had not been resorted to by the concerned Authority---Order of Authority was set aside and cases were remanded to decide afresh accordingly. Muhammad Tasnim for Appellants Muhammad Kassim Mirjat, A.A.G. for Official Respondents, Date of hearing: 10th January, 2002. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD IQBAL KAZI (MEMBER). --- These are six identical appeals filed under section 4 of the Sindh Service Tribunals Act, 1973 having common cause of action, viz. grievance against the seniority position assigned to respondent Nos.5 to 9 by the respondents Nos. 1 to 4. The same therefore, having disposed of by this single/common order. 2. Facts of the matter, although common, have different implications over the respective respondents (5 to 9) which may be elucidated as under:-- (i) Appeal No. 48 of 1995. The appellant states that he was appointed as Junior Clerk on…

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