1997 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH Versus UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENGINEERS, TEXILA and others
| Citation | 1997 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Sajjad Ali Shah, C. J. and Muhammad Bashir Khan Jehangiri, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH Versus UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENGINEERS, TEXILA and others |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1997 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Sajjad Ali Shah, C. J. and Muhammad Bashir Khan Jehangiri, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1997 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH Versus UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENGINEERS, TEXILA and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M. Bilal, Senior Advocate Supreme Court with Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑ on‑Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Promotion‑‑‑Petitioner an employee of statutory body (University) initially appointed in Grade‑11, was subsequently promoted to Selection Grade‑17‑‑‑Petitioner's grievance was that against post of Laboratory Supervisor Grade‑16, he was entitled to be promoted within 67 per cent. quota but was denied that promotion and against that post respondent was brought from another department and posted as temporary arrangement‑‑‑Petitioner was told that his grievance would be valid only when permanent appointment against that post was made‑‑‑Petitioner's contention was that such temporary arrangement had been continuing for last six years and petitioner had another six years to serve before he would attain age of superannuation ‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted to consider case of petitioner in the light of contention raised by him.
Judgment & Decree
Civil Petition No. 578 of 1995, decided on 8th April, 1996. ‑‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Promotion‑‑‑Petitioner an employee of statutory body (University) initially appointed in Grade‑11, was subsequently promoted to Selection Grade‑17‑‑‑Petitioner's grievance was that against post of Laboratory Supervisor Grade‑16, he was entitled to be promoted within 67 per cent. quota but was denied that promotion and against that post respondent was brought from another department and posted as temporary arrangement‑‑‑Petitioner was told that his grievance would be valid only when permanent appointment against that post was made‑‑‑Petitioner's contention was that such temporary arrangement had been continuing for last six years and petitioner had another six years to serve before he would attain age of superannuation ‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted to consider case of petitioner in the light of contention raised by him. M. Bilal, Senior Advocate Supreme Court with Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑ on‑Record for Petitioner. The petitioner is Lecturer Assistant and was initially so appointed in Grade‑11 in which he served for more than ten years and then got Selection Grade‑
17. In that grade he had served for more than five years. The grievance of the petitioner is that against the post of Laboratory Supervisor Grade‑16, he is entitled to be promoted within sixty‑seven per cent. quota but is denied that promotion and against that post respondent No. 3, Muhammad Anwar Hussain, is brought from another department and posted as temporary arrangement. The petitioner is informed that his grievance would be valid only when permanent appointment against that post is made. In the circumstances, it is contended that this temporary arrangement, has been continuing for last six years and petitioner has another six years to serve before he attains the age of superannuation.
2. Leave is granted to consider the case in the light of the contention raised by the petitioner. A.A./M‑3283/S Leave granted.