1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, LAHORE and 2 others Versus MUHAMMAD SAEED ZAFAR and another
| Citation | 1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Irshad Hasan Khan and Ch. Muhammad Arif, JJ |
| Parties | CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, LAHORE and 2 others Versus MUHAMMAD SAEED ZAFAR and another |
| Primary Law | Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Irshad Hasan Khan and Ch. Muhammad Arif, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, LAHORE and 2 others Versus MUHAMMAD SAEED ZAFAR and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ehsan Sabri, Assistant Advocate-General, Punjab instructed by Rao Muhammad Yusuf Khan, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Petitioners.
- Hafiz Tariq Nasim, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 6th July, 1998.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 1-10-1997 passed by Federal Service Tribunal, Lahore in Appeal No. 327-L of 1997).
R. 4
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212(3)
Expunction of adverse remarks recorded in Annual Confidential Report of civil servant-- Adverse remarks were expunged by Service Tribunal
Adverse remarks were required to be communicated within reasonable period-- Unreasonable delay in communicating said adverse remarks to civil servant having occurred, Departmental Authorities failed to explain each day's delay before Service Tribunal
Service Tribunal was, therefore, justified in not upholding such remarks and expunged the same
Dispute related to individual grievance wherein no question of law of public importance was involved warranting interference under Art.212(3) of the Constitution-- Leave to appeal was refused in circumstances. Ch. Saeed Ahmed v. Federation of Pakistan and others 1996 SCMR 256 rel.
Judgment & Decree
IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, J.
This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment dated 1-10-1997 passed by the Federal Service Tribunal, Lahore (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), in Appeal No-327-L of 1997.
2. The dispute herein relates to expunction of adverse remarks recorded in the Annual Confidential Report of respondent Muhammad Saeed Zafar, for the period from 1-1-1995 to 9-9-1995. It is an admitted fact that the Countersigning Officer recorded his remarks on 3-10-1996 and the same were communicated to the respondent on 16-2-1997 i.e. after a lapse of about 4-1/2 months. The representation filed by the respondent was not disposed of by the SGA&I Department. Consequently, the respondent approached the Tribunal at the expiry of the stipulated period of 90 days.
3. It is well-settled that adverse remarks should be communicated within reasonable period. Here there was unreasonable delay in communicating the adverse remarks to the respondent. The departmental authorities failed to explain each day's delay before the Tribunal. There being no reasonable explanation for not communicating the adverse remarks within the prescribed period, the Tribunal was right in not upholding such remarks and expunged the same. The same view was taken by this Court in the case of Ch. Saeed Ahmed v. Federation of Pakistan and others (1996 SCMR 256). In any event, the dispute herein relates to an individual grievance and no question of law of public importance is involved warranting interference under Article 212(3) of the Constitution.
4. Resultantly, the petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Leave is refused. A.A./C-17/S Leave refused.