Case Details

Citation(s)
2007 SLG 2120 2007 SLD 2120 2007 PLC 1315
Sindh High Court
C.Ps. Nos.D-148, 898, 1273 and 1426 of 2007, decision dated: 24-07-2007.
SABIHUDDIN AHMED, C.J. AND NADEEM AZHAR SIDDIQI, J

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

SHAUKAT ALI

VS

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN awl others SHAUKAT ALI vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN awl others

Law:

Section:

Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973)-.9---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---Promotion, eligibility for---Authorities that High Court did not have jurisdiction to entertain the matter regarding promotion as same fell within the preview of Service Tribunal in terms of Art.212 of the Constitution---Validity---Contention, ex facie was misconceived inasmuch as question raised related to the fitness and not eligibility of the petitioner to be promoted to a higher position and such position was clearly outside the jurisdiction of the Service Tribunal---Constitutional petition was allowed to the extent that petitioners could be considered for promotion in the forthcoming meeting of Central Selection Board, notwithstanding any remarks recorded by the authorities. Abdul Haseeb v. Muhammad Anees PLD 1994 SC 539 and Pir Muhammad Qureshi v. Chairman, EOF Board Wah Cantt. 1998. PLC (C.S.) 476 ref. Abdul Hafeez Lakho and Dr. Farogh Naseem for Petitioner. Mehmood Alain Rizvi, Standing Counsel along with Syed Asghar Ali Shah, D.S. Establishment Division for Respondents. ORDER All these petitions involve similar facts and common question of law and since it was ordered in C.P. of 2007 by consent that the petition be heard and disposed of at the Katcha Peshi stage, we have decided to dispose of all these petitions by this common judgment. Basically the petitioners who are civil servants eligible for promotion to BS-20 in different departments are aggrieved by respective decisions of the Central Selection Board that despite having qualified the qualification threshold of 75% marks in terms of the ESTACODE, they were not considered for promotion. On behalf of the respondents, it was initially urged that this Court did not have any jurisdiction to entertain the matter as the same fell within the purview of the Federal Service Tribunal in terms of Article 212 of the Constitution. The objection is ex facie misconceived inasmuch as admittedly…
🔒
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