1988 PLP 1921 (SCMR)
LUTFE ALI KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE SECRETARY, IRRIGATION & POWER DEPARTMENT,
| Citation | 1988 PLP 1921 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Ghulam Mujaddid Mirza and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | LUTFE ALI KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE SECRETARY, IRRIGATION & POWER DEPARTMENT, |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 1921 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP 1921 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Ghulam Mujaddid Mirza and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP 1921 (SCMR) (LUTFE ALI KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE SECRETARY, IRRIGATION & POWER DEPARTMENT,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Iqbal, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 11th July, 1988.
- Ch. Muhammad Iqbal, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the order dated 5-8-1981 of the Punjab Service Tribunal passed in Case No.415/638).
Art.212(3)--West Pakistan Civil Services (Pay Revision) Rules, 1964, R..9--Application of R.9--Terms and conditions of service Annual increment to promotee--Withdrawal of--Annual increment granted to promotee was withdrawn after 8 months on ground that it was not permissible under R.9 of West Pakistan Civil Services (Pay Revision) Rules, 1964 till he had put in 7 years of service in junior scale of .lass-I--Leave to appeal granted to consider contention of petitioner that these rules were applicable only to such persons who held posts specified in the Schedule attached to the Rules and as his post was not included in the Schedule the qualification for earning increment as laid down in said Rules did not apply to him--Case on the other Land was to be governed by R.4.7 of Civil Servants Rules which fates that an increment was to be drawn as a matter of routine.
Judgment & Decree
SHAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑‑This is a petition for special leave to appeal‑from the order dated 5‑8‑1981 of the Punjab Service Tribunal whereby the petitioner's appeal was dismissed.
2. The petitioner joined service on 15‑7‑1957 in the West Pakistan Government as Assistant Research Officer, Extra Assistant Ground Water Geologist, on a temporary basis. The post to which he was appointed was graded an Class‑II and carried a pay scale of Rs.215‑20‑450/25‑600/25‑
700. With effect from 1‑4‑1960 the whole department in which he was employed was transferred to, the Water and Power Development Authority. On 18‑7‑1963, the Authority promoted him to the post of Senior Geologist. This post was graded as senior Class‑I and carried a pay scale of Rs.600/40‑1,
150. On promotion his initial pay was fixed at Rs.600. On 18‑7‑1964, he was granted the first increment. Eight months later, the increment was withdrawn on the ground that he had not put in the requisite qualifying service for the grant of the increment. He filed a departmental representation but when it failed he filed an appeal before the Service Tribunal. The Tribunal rejected his appeal. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
3. The increment has been withdrawn from the petitioner on the ground that Rule 9, West Pakistan Civil Services (Pay Revision) Rules, 1964 did not permit the granting of annual increment to a promotee till he had put in 7 years of service in the junior scale of Class‑I. The contention on behalf of the petitioner is that these Rules were applicable only to such persons who held posts specified in the Schedule attached to the Rules. His post was not included in the Schedule and for that reason the qualification for earning increment as laid down in the said Rules did not apply to him. On the other hand, his case is to be governed by Rule 4.7 of the Civil Servant Rules which states that an increment is to be drawn as a matter routine.
4. The contention raised on behalf of the petitioner needs examination. Leave to appeal is granted. Security for costs in the sum of Rs.5,
000. The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with permission to the parties to file additional documents, if any, within two months. M.I. /L‑15/S Leave granted.