1991 PLP 786 (SCMR)
ABDUL LATIF KHAN — Petitioner Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1991 PLP 786 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Nasim Hasan Shah and |
| Parties | ABDUL LATIF KHAN — Petitioner Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 786 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 786 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah and.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 786 (SCMR) (ABDUL LATIF KHAN — Petitioner Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Qazi Atiqur Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court and Mian Shakirullah Jan, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 16th January, 1990.
- Qazi Atiqur Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court and Mian Shakirullah Jan, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 9-7-1988 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad in Service Appeal No. 168 (P) of 1985).
Art.212(3)
Service Tribunal in a very detailed and a comprehensive order rejected contention of petitioner that he was eligible for promotion from the date when his juniors were so found eligible and his claim that he was entitled to restoration of his seniority
Petitioner having not been able to show what term and condition of his service had been violated, case was not fit to be interfered with
Leave to appeal was refused.
Judgment & Decree
Qazi Atiqur Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court and Mian Shakirullah Jan, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 16th January, 1990. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.‑‑‑The petitioner's A.C.R. for 1981 was not before the Selection Board during the meeting of the Central Selection Board held. on 26‑12‑1982 for making promotion of the District Management Group Officers from BPS‑18 to BPS‑19 and acting on the remark recorded in the earlier A.C.R. of 1980 to the effect "not fit for promotion" he was not cleared for promotion. As the remarks of some of his other colleagues were not adverse they were duly cleared for promotion. In the subsequent meeting of the Central Selection Board held on 11‑12‑1983, however, when the A.C.R. for 1981 had become available the Board cleared the petitioner also for promotion. But as the petitioner's juniors had been cleared for promotion they became senior to him in BPS‑
19. The grievance of the petitioner is that if his A.C.R. of 1981 had been placed before the meeting of the Central Selection Board held on 26‑12‑1982 his case could have been deferred and on the basis of his subsequent good A.C.R. which had the effect of whittling, down the remarks contained in the A.C.R. of 1980 ("not fit for promotion") the petitioner would have been found eligible for promotion from the date when his juniors were so found. The Service Tribunal in a very detailed and a comprehensive order rejected this contention and the petitioner's claim that he was entitled to restoration of his seniority in these circumstances. Hence this petition for leave to appeal in this Court. The petitioner has not been able to show what term and condition of his service has been violated. Otherwise also this is not at all a fit case for exercise of this Court's jurisdiction under Article 212(3) of the Constitution. Dismissed. H.B.T./A‑751/S Petition dismissed.