PLC(CS) 1992

1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

MUSHTAQ AHMAD Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore High Court
Decided Date
Writ Petition No.3636-S of 1991, decided on 12th May, 1991.
Honorable Judges
Irshad Hasan Khan, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Forum / Court Lahore High Court
Bench Members Irshad Hasan Khan, J
Parties MUSHTAQ AHMAD Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB
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 Lahore High Court bench comprising: Irshad Hasan Khan, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (MUSHTAQ AHMAD Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Civil service

Representation

  • Muhammad Ilyas Khan for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

Promotion

Petitioner who was a Senior Scale Stenographer had contended that Senior Scale Stenographers in other Government Institutions had been categorised alongwith Assistants for promotion to post of Superintendent, but he had not been so categorised

Government had itself felt that Senior Scale Stenographer's omission from cadre of Superintendent was an omission and amendment in service rules was under process

Court directed that a fair and equitable decision in accordance with law be taken in the matter of petitioner's case.

Judgment & Decree

Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB Writ Petition No.3636-S of 1991, decided on 12th May, 1991.

Promotion

Petitioner who was a Senior Scale Stenographer had contended that Senior Scale Stenographers in other Government Institutions had been categorised alongwith Assistants for promotion to post of Superintendent, but he had not been so categorised

Government had itself felt that Senior Scale Stenographer's omission from cadre of Superintendent was an omission and amendment in service rules was under process

Court directed that a fair and equitable decision in accordance with law be taken in the matter of petitioner's case. Muhammad Ilyas Khan for Petitioner.