1987 PLP 1480 (SCMR)
A. HAMID SIAL‑‑Petitioner Versus THE FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1987 PLP 1480 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | A. HAMID SIAL‑‑Petitioner Versus THE FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 1480 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 PLP 1480 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 1480 (SCMR) (A. HAMID SIAL‑‑Petitioner Versus THE FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Aslam Chaudhary, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 13th June, 1987.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal dated 12‑5‑1982 in Appeal No. 151(L) of 1980). ‑‑‑S. 8‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)‑‑Upgrading of post from specific date‑‑Claim rejected by Service Tribunal on ground that Government was competent to upgrade various appointments from the date it considered appropriate‑‑Leave to appeal refused on ground that no substantial question of law of public importance was involved.
Judgment & Decree
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑This is a petition for special leave to appeal from the order, dated 12‑5‑1982 of the Federal Service Tribunal.
2. The petitioner joined service in the Ministry of Food and Agriculture as Assistant Soil Survey Research Officer in N.P.S.‑
16. His post was upgraded to N.P.S.‑17 on 21‑10‑1978. Certain other posts in the Ministry were upgraded to N.P.S.‑17 with effect from 28‑8‑1972. The case of the petitioner before the Federal Service Tribunal was that his post should have also been upgraded with effect from 28‑8‑1972 when the other posts were so upgraded. The Federal Service Tribunal rejected his appeal with the observation that it was up to the Government to upgrade various appointments from the dates it deemed appropriate. However, it made a recommendation to the Government to look into the grievance of the petitioner. The petitioner seeks leave to appeal from the order of the Federal Service Tribunal.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner we are l not satisfied that any substantial question of law of public importance arises in this case. This petition is accordingly dismissed. A . A . / A‑61 / S Petition dismissed.