Case Details

Citation(s)
2006 SLG 1820 2006 SLD 1820 2006 PLC 1081
Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad
Appeal No.307(L)CS of 2001, decision dated: 9thAugust, 2004.
JUSTICE (R) AMANULLAH ABBASI, CHAIRMAN AND MUHAMMAD IQBAL KHAN, MEMBER

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

ABDUL GHAFFAR MIAN

VS

GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, CABINET SECRETARIAT, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION through Secretary to Government of Pakistan, Islamabad and 6 others ABDUL GHAFFAR MIAN vs GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, CABINET SECRETARIAT, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION th

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973)-------S.22(2)---Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 1977, R.4(1)---Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), S.4---Promotion---Entitlement---Appeal to Service Tribunal---Appellant, who met all conditions prescribed for promotion to BPS-20 in Promotion Policy, had been superseded and respondents, who were junior to him, were promoted without indicating any solid reason for his supersession---Appellant during his 23 years service before his supersession, had held 'important and critical Secretarial as well as field positions/assignments in Provincial and Federal Governments. and he enjoyed unblemished record of service---Appellant was never communicated any adverse remarks or counselled about any lapse or deficiency in performance of his duties---Overall quantification score of appellant was 88 whereas score for quality and out-put of work and integrity, both moral and intellectual was 74,77 & 78 respectively---Minimum bench marks for promotion to BPS-20 were 70 marks in overall quantification score and same for quality and output of work and integrity---Other requirements as prescribed in Promotion Policy were also fulfilled by appellant---Respondent Authority had alleged that appellant had earned a large number of average reports which compared him unfavourably with private respondents who had been promoted---Further allegation was that appellant did not enjoy reputation of a clean officer in the department---Validity---Appellant, despite average reports, was promoted to BPS-19 in 1997 and average reports were not adverse reports---Such average reports, in circumstances should not create any impediment in the way of promotion of appellant to higher post of BPS-20 when his overall quantification score admittedly was more than private respondents who were promoted---No stigma was attached to reputations of appellant and no evidence to that effect was discernible either from his ACR's or any other adverse communication available on record---Appellant had never been communicated any remarks regarding his reputation being not a clean officer--No evidence was on record to show that appellant had a bad reputation--Justice had not been…
🔒
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