1995 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Kh. MUHAMMAD TARIQ Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through its Chief Secretary, Azad Kashmir, Muzaffarabad and 3 others
| Citation | 1995 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Service Tribunal Azad J&K |
| Bench Members | Raja Bashir Ahmad Khan, Chairman and Khawaja Abdul Hameed Member |
| Parties | Kh. MUHAMMAD TARIQ Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through its Chief Secretary, Azad Kashmir, Muzaffarabad and 3 others |
| Primary Law | Civil service‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil service‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Service Tribunal Azad J&K bench comprising: Raja Bashir Ahmad Khan, Chairman and Khawaja Abdul Hameed Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (Kh. MUHAMMAD TARIQ Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through its Chief Secretary, Azad Kashmir, Muzaffarabad and 3 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Khawaja Shahad Ahmed for Appellant.
- Syed Nazir Hussain Shah Kazmi for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑Promotion‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Post, of Deputy Director, Food having fallen vacant due to retirement of the official/civil servant who was working as District Food Controller was promoted as Deputy Director, Food on acting charge basis‑‑ CO‑Civil servant who was appointed on ad hoc basis and whose services were regularised and confirmed as Assistant Director, Food, filed petition against promotion of civil servant which was accepted and through notification matter was referred to Authorities to assess suitability of civil servant and co‑civil servant for post of Deputy Director, Food‑‑‑During pendency of proceedings, Statute according to which ad hoc appointment of co‑civil servant was regularised, was struck down by High Court and then by Supreme Court and appointment of co‑civil servant was declared ad hoc‑‑‑Situation was entirely changed after the decision of Supreme Court as status which co‑civil servant had prior to such decision was not available to him and he being ad hoc appointee could not challenge promotion of civil servant‑‑‑Notification under which matter was referred to Authorities to assess suitability of co -civil servant for promotion, had no legal sanctity.
Judgment & Decree
RAJA BASHIR AHMAD KHAN (CHAIRMAN).‑‑‑This appeal is directed against Notification No.FS/1530‑39/93, dated 26‑9‑1993 whereby the review petition of respondent No. 2 Raja Nadeem Ahsan was accepted and the matter was referred to Selection Board to assess the suitability of appellant and respondent No. 2 for grant of Grade B‑18.
2. Briefly stated the facts are that the appellant was appointed as District Food Controller in the Department of Food on the recommendations of the Public Service Commission on `30‑12‑1985. Respondent No. 2 was appointed as Assistant Director, Food in B‑17 on ad hoc basis by order dated 29‑5‑1988. Appellant rendered his services as District Food Controller for the period of more than seven years. The post of Deputy Director, Food B‑18 fell vacant on account of retirement of Shaikh Ali Akbar, Deputy Director, Food. The appellant was temporarily promoted as Deputy Director, Food in his own pay and scale on 4‑3‑1991 against that post. The case for the promotion of the appellant was referred to the Selection Board No. 1 which approved the promotion of the appellant on acting charge basis for the post of Deputy Director, Food. The services of respondent No. 2 were regularised and confirmed as Assistant Director, Food with effect from 16‑8‑1992. After the approval of his appointment the respondent No. 2 filed a review petition against the promotion of the appellant and consequently the impugned order was passed by the Government.
3. Written objections have been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein they have denied the contents of the appeal and prayed that the appeal
4. In the meantime the matter of regularisation of the service of respondent No. 2 and other persons who had been benefited by passing of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Servants (Regularisation of ad hoc Appointment) Act, 1992 came under consideration before the High Court in Writ Petition No. 89 of 1992 which was decided on 24‑3‑1994. The High Court was pleased to strike down the said Act and all appointments desired to be regulated by virtue of the provisions of the Act and Rules were declared as ad hoc appointments in nature and character. The affectees of this judgment filed appeal in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court was pleased to uphold the judgment of the High Court. Resultantly the Government issued Notification No. Admin/A‑17(16)/S.O.V/94, dated 5‑9‑1994. The situation under which the impugned Notification was issued has substantially changed on account of the decision of the High Court and Supreme Court and the appointment of respondent No. 2 has been declared as on adhoc basis which is purely temporary and liable to be terminated at any time or when a suitable person is available for the post after being recommended by the Public Service Commission. The status which respondent No.2 enjoyed when the impugned Notification was issued is no more available to him. The result is that the impugned Notification has been rendered a worthless piece of paper having no legal sanctity and is liable to be declared as such.
5. In the circumstances we declare that impugned Notification is of no legal effect as against the rights of the appellant. We, therefore, accept this appeal and set aside the impugned Notification. The parties will bear their own respective costs. H.B.T./264/AJ&K Appeal accepted.