PLC(CS) 1992

1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

Ch. MUHAMMAD AMIN Versus SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, RAWALPINDI and 19 others

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Civil Appeal No. 525 of 1990, decided on 3rd September, 1992.
Honorable Judges
Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry, Muhammad Rafiq Tarar and Wali Muhammad Khan, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry, Muhammad Rafiq Tarar and Wali Muhammad Khan, JJ
Parties Ch. MUHAMMAD AMIN Versus SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, RAWALPINDI and 19 others
Primary Law (a) Civil service, (b) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)
💡 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: (a) Civil service, (b) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973) 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 Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry, Muhammad Rafiq Tarar and Wali Muhammad Khan, JJ.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (Ch. MUHAMMAD AMIN Versus SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, RAWALPINDI and 19 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

(a) Civil service (b) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)

Representation

  • Zafar Pasha Chaudhry, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellant.
  • Ch. Ijaz Ahmed, Dy. Attorney General and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate -on-Record for Respondent No. 1.
  • D.M. Awan, Advocate Supreme Court and Ijaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents Nos. 9,10, 11 and 19.
  • Date of hearing: 28th June, 1992.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, dated 1-11-1989 in Appeal No. 163(R) of 1988).

USTACODE, 1983 Edition, para. 7

Lateral entry in Police Service-- Selection of Superintendent of Police through lateral entry to the rank of Deputy Inspector-General of Police--Validity

Seniority

Provision of "lateral entry" in Estacode, 1983 provided no limitation or bar that a Superintendent of Police could not be selected through lateral entry to the rank of Deputy Inspector-General of Police

Appellant being eligible for the post was selected by Selection Board after his suitability and fitness were determined by the said Board

Appellant was not disqualified under relevant rule to such promotion through lateral entry

Appellant having been appointed in Grade-19, earlier than respondents, would be senior to respondents

Appellant's seniority had thus, been correctly fixed in the list of seniority and his appointment to the post in question, through lateral entry was also justified. PLJ 1982 Tr. C. (S) 165,1983 PLC (C.S.) 995,1985 PLC (C.S.)133 and 1987 PLC (CS) 185 ref.

S. 4

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)

Appeal before Service Tribunal

Limitation

Gradation list was received by appellant on 31-5-1987

Appellant having applied for necessary documents filed his representation on 17-2-1988, after receipt of those documents and after waiting for statutory period submitted his appeal .before Service Tribunal on 14-6-1988

Appeal before Seance Tribunal would be deemed within time in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

USTACODE, 1983 Edition, para. 7

Lateral entry in Police Service-- Selection of Superintendent of Police through lateral entry to the rank of Deputy Inspector-General of Police--Validity

Seniority

Provision of "lateral entry" in Estacode, 1983 provided no limitation or bar that a Superintendent of Police could not be selected through lateral entry to the rank of Deputy Inspector-General of Police

Appellant being eligible for the post was selected by Selection Board after his suitability and fitness were determined by the said Board

Appellant was not disqualified under relevant rule to such promotion through lateral entry

Appellant having been appointed in Grade-19, earlier than respondents, would be senior to respondents

Appellant's seniority had thus, been correctly fixed in the list of seniority and his appointment to the post in question, through lateral entry was also justified. PLJ 1982 Tr. C. (S) 165,1983 PLC (C.S.) 995,1985 PLC (C.S.)133 and 1987 PLC (CS) 185 ref. (b) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)

S. 4

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)

Appeal before Service Tribunal

Limitation

Gradation list was received by appellant on 31-5-1987

Appellant having applied for necessary documents filed his representation on 17-2-1988, after receipt of those documents and after waiting for statutory period submitted his appeal .before Service Tribunal on 14-6-1988

Appeal before Seance Tribunal would be deemed within time in circumstances. Zafar Pasha Chaudhry, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellant. Ch. Ijaz Ahmed, Dy. Attorney General and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate -on-Record for Respondent No.

1. D.M. Awan, Advocate Supreme Court and Ijaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents Nos. 9,10, 11 and

19. Date of hearing: 28th June, 1992.