PLC 1983

1983 PLP (C (PLC)

MUHAMMAD IQBAL FAROOQ AND ANOTHER Versus SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, COMMUNICATIONS AND WORKS DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS ‑

Jurisdiction / Court
Service Tribunal Punjab
Decided Date
Cases Nos. 227 and 242 of 1982, decided on 2nd June, 1982.
Honorable Judges
S. Abdul Jabbar Khan, Chairman, Malik Zawwar Hussain and Abdul Hamid Chaudhry, Members
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1983 PLP (C (PLC)
Forum / Court Service Tribunal Punjab
Bench Members S. Abdul Jabbar Khan, Chairman, Malik Zawwar Hussain and Abdul Hamid Chaudhry, Members
Parties MUHAMMAD IQBAL FAROOQ AND ANOTHER Versus SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, COMMUNICATIONS AND WORKS DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS ‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1983 PLP (C (PLC)?

This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1983 PLP (C (PLC)?

The case was heard and decided by the Service Tribunal Punjab bench comprising: S. Abdul Jabbar Khan, Chairman, Malik Zawwar Hussain and Abdul Hamid Chaudhry, Members.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1983 PLP (C (PLC) (MUHAMMAD IQBAL FAROOQ AND ANOTHER Versus SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, COMMUNICATIONS AND WORKS DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS ‑). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Representation

  • Malik Amjad Hussain and Abdul Hamid Khokhar for Appellants.
  • Haroon‑ur‑Rashid Cheema, District Attorney for Respondents.
  • The respondents are represented by Mr. W. M. A. Shamami, Under Secretary, C & W Department and Mr. M. U. Ansari, Director (Admn.) Highway Department and the appellants are represented through their learned counsel Malik Amjad Hussain, Advocate and Mr. Abdul Hamid Khokhar, Advocate.

Headnotes / Summary

Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974)‑. ‑‑ S. 4‑Appellant claiming senioritySeniority list though prepar ed but not notified by Government‑Department directed by Tribunal to settle controversy in interest of good administration by notifying seniority list‑Appellant, held, could agitate, if so advised, against notified seniority list.

Judgment & Decree

Malik Amjad Hussain and Abdul Hamid Khokhar for Appellants. Haroon‑ur‑Rashid Cheema, District Attorney for Respondents. S. ABDUL JABBAR KHAN (CHAIRMAN).‑‑In cases of Muhammad Iqbal Farooq and Muhammad Aslam Gill, who have filed these appeals under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act of 1974 making grievances that they have been reverted to the posts of Sub‑Engineers whereas they were working as S. D. Os. since 1978. This Tribunal was pleased to issue an interim stay order calling upon the respondents to explain their point of view against the appeals so pending before us. The respondents are represented by Mr. W. M. A. Shamami, Under Secretary, C & W Department and Mr. M. U. Ansari, Director (Admn.) Highway Department and the appellants are represented through their learned counsel Malik Amjad Hussain, Advocate and Mr. Abdul Hamid Khokhar, Advocate. We have heard the parties at length and find that the appellants had never been promoted as S. D. Os. on regular basis although by stop‑gap arrangements, in view of the paucity of the regular incumbents, they have been working as S. D. Os. since 1978 and 1979. However, there is no dispute about the fact that the appellants are not regular S. D. Os. There is also a grievance on behalf of Muhammad Aslam Gill, made through his learned counsel that despite he having put in 32 years long service, he does not know where he stands because no seniority list has been notified so far and number of juniors to him have been promoted. The representative of the Department has shown us the list duly pre pared in this behalf which required notification. In this matter we direct the respondents to settle this controversy in the interest of, good ad ministration by notifying the list which ultimately has to be notified, as earl as possible. However, the appellants can agitate against the said notified list, if so advised, if their rights are jeopardised. Mr. W. M. A. Sbamami, Under Secretary has suggested 'that he had a proposal particularly, in view of the advice of the Under Secretary (General), C. & W. that as nine posts are going to be available from 1st July, 1982 onward with the creation of a new Division at Gujranwala, therefore, the appellants can be accommodated after 1st July, and it they feel so advised, the appellants can proceed on one month's leave till the said eventuality. ' The fact of the matter is that the jurisdiction of this Tribunal is only confined to matters besides promotion which has been explicitly taken out of our jurisdiction by virtue of sections 4 (1) (b) of the (Punjab Service Tribunals Act. Therefore, we hold that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear both these appeals which are not maintainable. As such both the appeals are disposed of with no order as to Costs. A. E. Appeals disposed of,