1998 PLP 2337 (SCMR)
JAVED NAWAB‑‑‑Petitioner Versus CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN, QUETTA and 9 others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1998 PLP 2337 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Irshad Hasan Khan and Sh. Ijaz Nisar, JJ |
| Parties | JAVED NAWAB‑‑‑Petitioner Versus CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN, QUETTA and 9 others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Balochistan Civil Servants Act (IK of 1974)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 2337 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Balochistan Civil Servants Act (IK of 1974)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 2337 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Irshad Hasan Khan and Sh. Ijaz Nisar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP 2337 (SCMR) (JAVED NAWAB‑‑‑Petitioner Versus CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN, QUETTA and 9 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Habib‑ul‑Wahab‑ul‑Khairi, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Malik Sikandar Khan, Advocate‑General, Balochistan for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 1st April, 1998.
- Habib-ul-Wahab-ul-Khairi, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Malik Sikandar Khan, Advocate-General, Balochistan for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment/order, dated 8‑10‑1996, passed by the High Court of Balochistan, Quetta, in Constitutional Petition No.215 of 1996). ‑‑‑‑S. 9‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Promotion‑‑ Entitlement‑‑‑Civil servant's grievance was that despite recommendations made by Competent Authority for his promotion, he had not been considered for the same on one pretext or the other and that whenever any vacancy occurred, the same was filled in on current or acting charge basis or by transfer from other departments‑‑‑Contention raised by civil servant was supported by impugned judgment of High Court‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and same was allowed with direction to Authorities that civil servant must be considered for promotion against specified post and until his case was finalised on merits, no other incumbent would be promoted to post in question. either temporarily or on current charge basis, acting charge basis or by transfer promotion etc. Pakistan Railways through G.M., Lahore and another v. Zafarullah, Assistant Electrical Engineer and others 1997 SCMR 1730 rel.
Judgment & Decree
IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, J.
Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment, dated 8-10-1996, passed by the learned Division Bench of the High Court of Balochistan, Quetta, in Constitutional Petition No. 215 of 1996.
2. The brief facts are that the petitioner is an Assistant Engineer in Civil Works Directorate Education Department under the control of respondent No.
2. His grievance is that despite recommendations made by the competent Authority for his promotion against any non-engineering professional post he has not been considered for the same on one pretext or the other. On the- contrary, whenever a vacancy existed the same was filled in on current, or acting charge basis or by transfer from other department.
3. The contention raised by the petitioner finds support from paragraph 8 of the impugned judgment which reads as under:-- As mentioned earlier the case of petitioner was recommended for promotion against any non-engineering professional post, but he could not be considered due to want of vacancy and would certainly be considered subject to availability of such post and as per decision of this Court made in abovementioned Constitutional petition. " Reference may also be made to Pakistan Railways through G.M., Lahore and another v. Zafarullah, Assistant Electrical Engineer and others (1997 SCMR 1730), wherein it was observed that:-- We would like to observe that the appointments on current or acting charge basis are contemplated under the instructions as well as the Rules for a short duration on a stop-gap arrangement in cases where the posts are to be filled by initial appointments. Therefore, continuance of such appointees for a number of years on current or acting charge basis is negation of the spirit of the instructions and the Rules. It is, therefore, desirable that where appointment on current or acting charge basis are necessary in the public interest, such appointments should not continue indefinitely and every effort should be made to fill posts throueh regular appointments in shortest possible time. A copy of the judgment be sent to Establishment Division for future guidance."
4. In view of the above, we convert this petition into appeal, allow the same and direct respondents Nos. 1 to 5 that the petitioner shall be considered for promotion against any non-engineering professional post and until his case is finalised on merits, no other incumbent shall be promoted to the post of Executive Engineer, either temporarily or on current charge basis, acting charge basis or by transfer, promotion etc. A.A./J-10/S Appeal accepted