1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
AZIZ-UL-REHMAN Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Chief Secretary and 3 others
| Citation | 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Service Tribunal Azad J&K |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Sajawal Khan, Chairman and Raja Muhammad Ashraf Kayani, Member |
| Parties | AZIZ-UL-REHMAN Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Chief Secretary and 3 others |
| Primary Law | (b) Civil service, (a) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Servants Appeal Rules, 1982 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: (b) Civil service, (a) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Servants Appeal Rules, 1982 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 Service Tribunal Azad J&K bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Sajawal Khan, Chairman and Raja Muhammad Ashraf Kayani, Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (AZIZ-UL-REHMAN Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Chief Secretary and 3 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Kh. Abdus Samad for Appellant.
- Nemo for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Rr. 4 & 8
Civif servant was aggrieved of order of Appellate Authority against which no appeal lay under the Rules to the next higher Authority
Scope of appeal thus was limited and right of appeal was given only to that civil servant who was aggrieved by order of his appointing Authority, but an exception to that general rule of procedure was provided by Rule under which representation before the next higher Authority was allowed to civil servant aggrieved by order of Appellate Authority
Appeal brought by civil servant before Appellate Authority, would be treated as a representation and period spent on pursuing that remedy before departmental Authority would be allowed to civil servant so as to bring his appeal to Tribunal within time.
Civil servant was promoted and posted against an ex-cadre post in Settlement Department with a right to be reverted back to his original Department at any time
Lien of civil servant remained intact in his original Department during all his temporary service against an ex-cadre post
Since civil servant was not confirmed against post to which he was promoted, no right of service had accrued to him against that job in Settlement Department
Reversion of civil servant to his original post, could not be accepted to mean infringement of any terms and conditions of service of civil servant
Civil servant not being an aggrieved person, his appeal for being retained in service of Settlement Department, was not maintainable.
Judgment & Decree
(a) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Servants Appeal Rules, 1982
Rr. 4 & 8
Civif servant was aggrieved of order of Appellate Authority against which no appeal lay under the Rules to the next higher Authority
Scope of appeal thus was limited and right of appeal was given only to that civil servant who was aggrieved by order of his appointing Authority, but an exception to that general rule of procedure was provided by Rule under which representation before the next higher Authority was allowed to civil servant aggrieved by order of Appellate Authority
Appeal brought by civil servant before Appellate Authority, would be treated as a representation and period spent on pursuing that remedy before departmental Authority would be allowed to civil servant so as to bring his appeal to Tribunal within time. (b) Civil service
Civil servant was promoted and posted against an ex-cadre post in Settlement Department with a right to be reverted back to his original Department at any time
Lien of civil servant remained intact in his original Department during all his temporary service against an ex-cadre post
Since civil servant was not confirmed against post to which he was promoted, no right of service had accrued to him against that job in Settlement Department
Reversion of civil servant to his original post, could not be accepted to mean infringement of any terms and conditions of service of civil servant
Civil servant not being an aggrieved person, his appeal for being retained in service of Settlement Department, was not maintainable. Kh. Abdus Samad for Appellant. Nemo for Respondents.