PLC(CS) 1992

1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

AZIZUDDIN Versus SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, ISLAMABAD and another

Jurisdiction / Court
Federal Service Tribunal
Decided Date
Appeal No. 185(R) of 1990, decided on 19th November, 1991.
Honorable Judges
S.M. Ishaq, Misbah Ullah Khan and Ch. Hasan Nawaz, Members
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Forum / Court Federal Service Tribunal
Bench Members S.M. Ishaq, Misbah Ullah Khan and Ch. Hasan Nawaz, Members
Parties AZIZUDDIN Versus SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, ISLAMABAD 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 Federal Service Tribunal bench comprising: S.M. Ishaq, Misbah Ullah Khan and Ch. Hasan Nawaz, Members.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (AZIZUDDIN Versus SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, ISLAMABAD and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Civil service

Representation

  • Aminur Rehman for Appellant.
  • Hafiz SA. Rahman with Aurangzeb Awan, A.D.R. for Respondents.
  • Date of hearing. 18th November, 1991.

Headnotes / Summary

Promotion--.Civil servant, who was initially appointed as Public Relations Officer in Grade-16 on ad hoc basis for a period of six months, was appointed afresh after expiry of period of six months as Assistant Director in same Grade and his fresh appointment was also on ad hoc basis

Services of civil servant being on ad hoc basis, were liable to termination at any time and without assigning any reason during period of ad hoc appointment

During period of his ad hoc appointment, post of Assistant Director was upgraded to Grade-17 and persons who were eligible were upgraded

Civil servant who was not upgraded being on ad hoc basis, was upgraded after about 4 years from his fresh appointment

Civil servant claimed emoluments and increments of Grade-17 when his other colleagues were upgraded to Grade-17

Claim of Civil servant was not tenable as he had been appointed only on ad hoc basis against Grade-16 and was never promoted like others, to upgraded post and he always remained working against Grade-16 till he was duly upgraded to Grade-17.

Judgment & Decree

SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, ISLAMABAD and another Appeal No. 185(R) of 1990, decided on 19th November, 1991.

Promotion--.Civil servant, who was initially appointed as Public Relations Officer in Grade-16 on ad hoc basis for a period of six months, was appointed afresh after expiry of period of six months as Assistant Director in same Grade and his fresh appointment was also on ad hoc basis

Services of civil servant being on ad hoc basis, were liable to termination at any time and without assigning any reason during period of ad hoc appointment

During period of his ad hoc appointment, post of Assistant Director was upgraded to Grade-17 and persons who were eligible were upgraded

Civil servant who was not upgraded being on ad hoc basis, was upgraded after about 4 years from his fresh appointment

Civil servant claimed emoluments and increments of Grade-17 when his other colleagues were upgraded to Grade-17

Claim of Civil servant was not tenable as he had been appointed only on ad hoc basis against Grade-16 and was never promoted like others, to upgraded post and he always remained working against Grade-16 till he was duly upgraded to Grade-17. Aminur Rehman for Appellant. Hafiz SA. Rahman with Aurangzeb Awan, A.D.R. for Respondents. Date of hearing. 18th November, 1991.