PLC(CS) 1992

1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

FAZAL HUSSAIN Versus D.I: G. POLICE, GUJRANWALA and another

Jurisdiction / Court
Service Tribunal Punjab
Decided Date
Appeal No.113/726 of 1988, decided on 27th January, 1990.
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Mehmud Aslam Pirzada, Chairman and Abdul Hamid Khan, Member
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Forum / Court Service Tribunal Punjab
Bench Members Muhammad Mehmud Aslam Pirzada, Chairman and Abdul Hamid Khan, Member
Parties FAZAL HUSSAIN Versus D.I: G. POLICE, GUJRANWALA and another
Primary Law Civil service
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?

This judgment primarily cites: Civil service as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?

The case was heard and decided by the Service Tribunal Punjab bench comprising: Muhammad Mehmud Aslam Pirzada, Chairman and Abdul Hamid Khan, Member.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (FAZAL HUSSAIN Versus D.I: G. POLICE, GUJRANWALA and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Civil service

Representation

  • M.A. Riaz for Appellant.
  • Ch. Manzoor Hussain, D.A. for Respondents.

Headnotes / Summary

Promotion

Relevant record produced before Tribunal had unrebuttedly proved that departmental representation of civil servant with regard to his promotion and confirmation as Sub-Inspector, was rejected by Authorities without passing self-speaking orders, which otherwise were not maintainable under law

Tribunal set aside orders of Authorities and directed them to decide case afresh in accordance with law on merits.

Judgment & Decree

D.I: G. POLICE, GUJRANWALA and another Appeal No.113/726 of 1988, decided on 27th January, 1990. Civil service

Promotion

Relevant record produced before Tribunal had unrebuttedly proved that departmental representation of civil servant with regard to his promotion and confirmation as Sub-Inspector, was rejected by Authorities without passing self-speaking orders, which otherwise were not maintainable under law

Tribunal set aside orders of Authorities and directed them to decide case afresh in accordance with law on merits. M.A. Riaz for Appellant. Ch. Manzoor Hussain, D.A. for Respondents.