| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2008 SLG 1243 2008 SLD 1243 2008 PLC 353 |
Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad
Appeal No.1663(R)CS of 2005, decided on 13th December, 2007, Date of hearing: 5th December, 2007.
CH. MUHAMMAD ILYAS AND SYED BILAL AHMED, MEMBERS
Hafiz Ali Asghar for Appellant. Javed Aziz Sandhu, Standing Counsel with D.R. Kifatullah, Superintendent for
Respondents.
Appeal No.1663(R)CS of 2005, decided on 13th December, 2007, Date of hearing: 5th December, 2007.
CH. MUHAMMAD ILYAS AND SYED BILAL AHMED, MEMBERS
Hafiz Ali Asghar for Appellant. Javed Aziz Sandhu, Standing Counsel with D.R. Kifatullah, Superintendent for
Respondents.
MUHAMMAD MUNIR KHAN
VS
ENGINEER-INCHIEF EINCS BRANCH GHQ, RAWALPINDI and 2 others
Law: Civil Servants Act, 1973
Section: 9
Law: Service Tribunals Act, 1973
Section: 4
Law: Civil Servants (Seniority) Rules, 1993
Section: 3(c)
Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973)--- ----S. 9---Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), S.4---Civil Servants (Seniority) Rules, 1993, R.3(c)---Appeal---Promotion, entitlement to---Appellant was superseded due to punishment awarded to him, whereas his junior was promoted---Appellant who though was subsequently promoted after more than one year from the promotion of his junior, had filed appeal with a prayer that he be assigned seniority in terms. of R.3(c) of the Civil Servants (Seniority) Rules, 1993---Validity---Minor penalty, such as censure, would not constitute a bar to promotion---Award of penalty fell within the domain of the Competent Authority to punish rather than Departmental Promotion Committee to interpret it for a differentiated weightage to justify a discrimination---Censure was a minor penalty and the law was that a minor penalty would not stand in the way of promotion---Record of appellant was generally such as would make him fit for promotion…
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