1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Dr. MUHAMMAD ASHRAF Versus FINANCE DIVISION, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD
| Citation | 1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian and Fazal Ilahi Khan, JJ |
| Parties | Dr. MUHAMMAD ASHRAF Versus FINANCE DIVISION, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD |
| Primary Law | Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973) 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: Ajmal Mian and Fazal Ilahi Khan, 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)) (Dr. MUHAMMAD ASHRAF Versus FINANCE DIVISION, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 8th November, 1995.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 21-5-1995 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, passed in Appeal No. 83-R of 1995).
S. 17
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)
Civil servant Entitlement to advance increments
Civil servant in his earlier assignment was allowed four advance increments for having degree in M. Phil. and two advance increments on basis of his past experience
Civil servant, thereafter; joined Education Department wherein he was allowed four increments for his M. Phil. degree but benefit of two advance increments for past experience was denied to him
Civil servant could not point out any rule or instruction under which he could claim two advance increments as a matter of right on account of his past experience
In absence of any rule or instruction, it was within discretion of respondent Authority to allow such advance increments to him
Factum that civil servant had applied through proper channel for subsequent post had no nexus with the question whether civil servant was entitled to have two advance increments on account of his 13past experience
Civil servant's fresh employment in different establishment would entitle him to claim salary and other benefits which were attached to such post
Leave to appeal was refused in circumstances. Petitioner in person.
Judgment & Decree
AJMAL MIAN, J.
This is a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment dated 21-5-1995 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal, passed in Appeal No. 83(R) of 1995 filed by the petitioner against the refusal of the respondent to grant two advance increments on account of his past experience and performance. dismissing the same.
2. The brief facts are that the petitioner joined as Scientific Officer (BPS-17) in the Pakistan Agricultural Research Council, hereinafter referred to as the P.A.R.C. He was allowed four advance increments for having degree in M. Phil. and two advance increments on the basis of his past experience. The petitioner, in response to an advertisement of the Ministry of Education for some posts of Lecturers, successfully applied for the above post and joined as a Lecturer in F.G. College, H-9, Islamabad, with effect from 20-7-1989. His salary was fixed without allowing him the benefit of above six advance increments. However, upon his representation, four advance increments were granted to the petitioner on account of having degree in M. Phil. His request for allowing two' advance increments on account of his past experience was turned down by the department, by the appellant authority as well as by the Tribunal through the impugned judgment. The petitioner has, therefore filed the present petition for leave to appeal.
3. In support of the above petition, the petitioner who has appeared in person, has vehemently contended that since he had applied for the above post of Lecturer through proper channel, he was entitled to the same emoluments which he was drawing in P.A.R.C. However, he has not been able to point out any statutory rule or instruction of the Education Department under which he can claim two advance increments as a matter of right on account of his past experience. In the absence of any such rule or instruction, it was within the discretion of the respondent not to have allowed the same to him. The factum that the petitioner had applied through proper channel for the above post of Lecturer has no nexus with the question, whether the petitioner was entitled to have two advance increments on account of his past experience. This was a fresh employment in a different establishment i.e. the-education Department in place of P.A.R.C. and this was not a transfer from one department to another. In this view of the matter, the petitioner was entitled to claim salary and other benefits which were attached to the above post of Lecturer. He has not even pointed out that in the notice published for the above post, any promise was made by the department to give him two advance increments 'on account of his past experience. The petition has no merits. Leave is refused. A.A./M-131/S???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Leave refused.