1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
SIDDEEO AHMAD NAGRA Versus SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
| Citation | 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Federal Service Tribunal |
| Bench Members | Syed Ally Madad Shah, Chairman, |
| Parties | SIDDEEO AHMAD NAGRA Versus SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, ISLAMABAD |
| Primary Law | Per Ch. Hasan Nawaz, Member (Minority view), (a) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), Per Syed Ally Madad Shah, Chairman and Rana Rifat Sated, Member (Majority View) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Per Ch. Hasan Nawaz, Member (Minority view), (a) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), Per Syed Ally Madad Shah, Chairman and Rana Rifat Sated, Member (Majority View) 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,.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (SIDDEEO AHMAD NAGRA Versus SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, ISLAMABAD). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Date of hearing: 21st November, 1991.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 4(1)
Aggrieved Civil Servant could prefer appeal to Service Tribunal only against a final order, original or appellate, made by departmental Authority in respect of terms and conditions of his service
There being no original or appellate order, which could be appealed against, appeal was not maintainable. In so far as the provisions of section 4(1), Service Tribunals Act 1973 go, the only requirement was the existence of an order, even though it was not directly communicated to the civil servant. He might come across such order in an indirect manner, as it had happened in the present case. This knowledge or information would be enough for him to press the provisions of section 4 into service and prefer a departmental appeal or representation under first proviso to subsection 4(1) of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973. This was exactly what the appellant had done in this case by preferring an appeal to the Prime Minister of Pakistan on 23-9-1990, which does not appear to have been forwarded by the Establishment Division. Appellant in person. Muhammad Amir Akbar Khan, Standing Counsel for the Government.
Judgment & Decree
Per Syed Ally Madad Shah, Chairman and Rana Rifat Sated, Member (Majority View)
(a) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)
S. 4(1)
Aggrieved Civil Servant could prefer appeal to Service Tribunal only against a final order, original or appellate, made by departmental Authority in respect of terms and conditions of his service
There being no original or appellate order, which could be appealed against, appeal was not maintainable. In so far as the provisions of section 4(1), Service Tribunals Act 1973 go, the only requirement was the existence of an order, even though it was not directly communicated to the civil servant. He might come across such order in an indirect manner, as it had happened in the present case. This knowledge or information would be enough for him to press the provisions of section 4 into service and prefer a departmental appeal or representation under first proviso to subsection 4(1) of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973. This was exactly what the appellant had done in this case by preferring an appeal to the Prime Minister of Pakistan on 23-9-1990, which does not appear to have been forwarded by the Establishment Division. Appellant in person. Muhammad Amir Akbar Khan, Standing Counsel for the Government. Date of hearing: 21st November, 1991.