PLC(CS) 1992

1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

GUL BEG KHAN NIAZI Versus PRIME MINISTER OF PAKISTAN through

Jurisdiction / Court
Federal Service Tribunal
Decided Date
Appeal No. 44(R) of 1990, decided on 12th January, 1992.
Honorable Judges
Syed Ally Madad Shah, Chairman, Rana Rifat Saeed and Misbah Ullah Khan, Members
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Forum / Court Federal Service Tribunal
Bench Members Syed Ally Madad Shah, Chairman, Rana Rifat Saeed and Misbah Ullah Khan, Members
Parties GUL BEG KHAN NIAZI Versus PRIME MINISTER OF PAKISTAN through
Primary Law Civil service
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?

This judgment primarily cites: Civil service 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 Federal Service Tribunal bench comprising: Syed Ally Madad Shah, Chairman, Rana Rifat Saeed and Misbah Ullah Khan, Members.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (GUL BEG KHAN NIAZI Versus PRIME MINISTER OF PAKISTAN through). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Civil service

Representation

  • ----Promotion---Principle for promotion of Trained Graduate Teachers of "General Cadre", to which civil servant/appellant belonged and the "closed Are" to which respondent belonged laid down ratio for promotion between he Teachers in the General Cadre and those of closed Cadre as 12:1---Only twelve posts of teachers were available for promotion upto 21-2-1979 when civil servant was promoted---All those. Posts were to be filled in by the Trained graduate Teachers of the "General Cadre" to which the appellant civil servant belonged---View propounded by Department for displacing the seniority position of appellant was not correct, for respondent could not occupy the 12th vacancy, which was occupied by the appellant civil servant and he could only be promoted against the 13th vacancy available for the "Closed Cadre"-- Respondent's ante-dated promotion was with the purpose of placing him senior to the civil servant which was unjustified---Respondent's ante-dated promotion being without lawful authority was of no legal effect.
  • Raja Muhammad Asghar Khan for Appellant.
  • Hafiz SA. Rehman, Standing Counsel for Respondents Nos. 1 to 3.
  • P.E. Siddiqi for Respondent No. 4.
  • Dates of hearing: 1st and 2nd December, 1991.

Judgment & Decree

Appeal No. 44(R) of 1990, decided on 12th January, 1992.

Promotion

Principle for promotion of Trained Graduate Teachers of "General Cadre", to which civil servant/appellant belonged and the "closed Are" to which respondent belonged laid down ratio for promotion between he Teachers in the General Cadre and those of closed Cadre as 12:1

Only twelve posts of teachers were available for promotion upto 21-2-1979 when civil servant was promoted

All those. Posts were to be filled in by the Trained graduate Teachers of the "General Cadre" to which the appellant civil servant belonged

View propounded by Department for displacing the seniority position of appellant was not correct, for respondent could not occupy the 12th vacancy, which was occupied by the appellant civil servant and he could only be promoted against the 13th vacancy available for the "Closed Cadre"-- Respondent's ante-dated promotion was with the purpose of placing him senior to the civil servant which was unjustified

Respondent's ante-dated promotion being without lawful authority was of no legal effect. Raja Muhammad Asghar Khan for Appellant. Hafiz SA. Rehman, Standing Counsel for Respondents Nos. 1 to

3. P.E. Siddiqi for Respondent No.

4. Dates of hearing: 1st and 2nd December, 1991.