Case Details

Citation(s)
2006 SLG 1745 2006 SLD 1745 2006 PLC 649
Peshawar High Court
Writ Petition No.1326 of 2002, decision dated: 17-03-2006.
SHAH, JEHAN KHAN AND SALIM KHAN, JJ

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

Syed KAMAL HUSSAIN SHAH

VS

GOVERNMENT OF N.W.F.P. through Secretary Finance, Peshawar and 8 others Syed KAMAL HUSSAIN SHAH vs GOVERNMENT OF N.W.F.P. through Secretary Finance, Peshawar and 8 others

Law:

Section:

(a) Fundamental Rules-------F.R. 22(a)(b)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---Transfer to other department---Petitioner serving as Enquiry Officer (BPS-17) was relieved from his parent department to join the post of Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate on contract basis for a period of one year---Petitioner was allowed the right of reversion to his parent Department---Petitioner was drawing his salary at a certain stage of the time-scale of pay in BPS-17 against his old post---Same stage was available, neither higher nor lower than the post of Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate---Application of petitioner for the new post was departmentally forwarded and consequently, he was' allowed reversion to his parent Department by retaining his lien there---Case of petitioner, in circumstances fell under sub-clause (ii) of sub-rule (c) of F.R. 22 of Fundamental Rules, because the new post did not involve the assumption of duty or responsibility of greater importance---Petitioner, in circumstances, was to draw his initial pay at the stage of the time-scale which was equal to his substantive pay in respect of the old post---Petitioner who had fulfilled the condition prescribed in clause (a) of F.R. 22 of Fundamental Rules, was not liable to be treated in accordance with clause (b) of F.R.22. (b) Civil services- --"Post on contract basis" and a "regular post"---Distinction---Only difference between a post on contract basis and a regular post, was that a post on contract basis for a certain period whereafter the services were to be terminated/returned and the incumbent was not entitled to pensionary benefits, while appointment on a regular post was to continue upto the stage of retirement and the incumbent was entitled to pensionary benefits under relevant rules---Question of grant of increment during the period of appointment on contract basis for one year had already been settled in F.R.22 of Fundamental Rules---As an increment was not to be granted while performing duties on contract basis; increment on pay of old post was to be given and that was to be considered as the increment because that would be the only increment and question of…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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