1989 PLP 932 (SCMR)
PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Secretary, Government of Punjab and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD FAROOQ BHATTI — Respondent
| Citation | 1989 PLP 932 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | ---Art.212(3)--Instructions for writing Confidential Reports--Leave to appeal granted to examine contention whether Reporting Officer at two stations being one and same and total working period of civil servant at both stations being more than three months, such Reporting Officer was competent to report on working and conduct of such a civil servant.--Civil services. |
| Bench Members | Nasim Hasan Shah, Abdul Qadir Shaikh and Ghulam Mujaddid JJ |
| Parties | PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Secretary, Government of Punjab and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD FAROOQ BHATTI — Respondent |
| Primary Law | (a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 932 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 932 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the ---Art.212(3)--Instructions for writing Confidential Reports--Leave to appeal granted to examine contention whether Reporting Officer at two stations being one and same and total working period of civil servant at both stations being more than three months, such Reporting Officer was competent to report on working and conduct of such a civil servant.--Civil services. bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah, Abdul Qadir Shaikh and Ghulam Mujaddid JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 932 (SCMR) (PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Secretary, Government of Punjab and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD FAROOQ BHATTI — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Sharif Chauhan, Advocate Supreme Court and Rao Muhammad Yousuf Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 15th November, 1988.
- Muhammad Sharif Chauhan, Advocate Supreme Court and Rao Muhammad Yousuf Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 12-8-1985 of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore in Appeal No.212/116 of 1985).
Art.212(3)--Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S.5--Leave to appeal granted to consider contention whether appeal filed by civil servant being time barred could not be accepted without considering question of limitation and condoning it by an express order.
Art.212(3)--Instructions for writing Confidential Reports--Leave to appeal granted to examine contention whether Reporting Officer at two stations being one and same and total working period of civil servant at both stations being more than three months, such Reporting Officer was competent to report on working and conduct of such a civil servant.--[Civil services].
Judgment & Decree
NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.‑‑It is contended by the learned counsel for the Provincial Government that:‑ (i) The appeal filed by the respondent being time‑barred could not be1A accepted without considering the question of limitation and condoning it by an express order; (ii) The reporting officer of the respondent both at Mianwali and Kallar Kot being one and the same namely the Deputy Director (Food), Sargodha Region, Sargodha and the total working period at the above two stations of the respondent being more than three months, the aforesaid officer (Deputy Director Food) was competent to report on the working and conduct of the respondent. These contentions require further consideration. Leave granted. The appeal shall be made ready on the present record, with liberty to the parties to add further documents, if any and put up for hearing at an early date. M.Y.H./P‑82/S Leave granted.