1984 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
FAZAL AHMAD Versus BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
| Citation | 1984 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Service Tribunal Punjab |
| Bench Members | S. Abdul Jabbar Khan, Chairman, Malik Zawwar Hussain and Abdul Hamid Chaudhry, Members |
| Parties | FAZAL AHMAD Versus BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB AND ANOTHER |
| Primary Law | Civil service‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1984 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil service‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1984 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
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: 1984 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (FAZAL AHMAD Versus BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB AND ANOTHER). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- A. G. Humayun, District Attorney for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑ Adverse remarks‑Meaning‑Reporting Officer should comment upon work of civil servant adversely, and should have solid grounds to say so‑"Should improve his quality of work"‑General remarks of such nature to a civil servant having clean and unble mished record of long service‑‑Cannot be considered as adverse but simply of advisory nature. Appellant in person.
Judgment & Decree
A. G. Humayun, District Attorney for Respondent. S. ABDUL JABBAR KHAN (CHAIRMAN).‑Fatal Ahmad has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, in which he has impleaded the Full Board, Board of Revenue Punjab, Lahore and Senior Member (Estt.), Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore, as respon dents.
2. By virtue of this appeal he has prayed that the impugned order by which the entry has been made in his A. C. R. of 1976, be expunged, as well as the order by which his representation rejected, be set aside. He has also prayed that he may be allowed to draw N. P. S.‑12 and N. P. S. 14 w. e. f. 1st February, 1978 to 11th January, 1982.
3. Brief facts of the case are that it was observed in the end of 1976 by the Assistant Director (Admn.) that the appellant should improve his quality of work. The appellant made several representations against the said entries in his A. C. R. of 1976, but failed every time. He even went before the Full Board of the Board of Revenue, Punjab, but he was told that the appeal would not lie before that forum. The appellant made representation before the Government but did not bear fruit and has come up before this Tribunal.
4. We have heard the appellant in person as well as learned District Attorney assisted by the Department and have also carefully gone through his A. C. R. and find the A. C. Rs. of the appellant before and after this adverse entry, are absolutely without any blemish and be has always been considered a willing worker, efficient and honest. We have also looked into the nature of the adverse entry in his A. C. R. of .1976, and are of the considered opinion, that the same cannot be considered as adverse and it is only advisory in nature. Adverse entry means that the Reporting Office should comment upon the work of the civil servant adversely and he should have solid grounds to say so. A general remarks of this nature, given to a civil servant, who has clean and unblemished record of long service at his credit, would not, in any way, be considered as adverse.
5. In view of the above, we hold that entry recorded in the A. C. R. of 1976, of the appellant, is only advisory in nature and not adverse.
6. With regard to the prayer of the appellant that lie should be given the benefit of N. P. S.‑12 to N. P. S.‑14 w. e. f. 1st December, 1978 to 11th January, 1981, we are afraid, we cannot concede to his claim as this is beyond the jurisdiction of this Tribunal to accept such like prayer.
7. Resultantly the appeal is disposed of in the terms so given above. There will be no order as to costs. A. E. Appeal dismissed.