1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
JAVID IQBAL KHAN Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Chief Secretary and 3 others
| Citation | 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Service Tribunal Azad J&K |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Sajawal Khan, Chairman and Raja Muhammad Ashraf Kayani, Member |
| Parties | JAVID IQBAL KHAN Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Chief Secretary and 3 others |
| Primary Law | (b) Civil service, (a) Civil service |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: (b) Civil service, (a) 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 Service Tribunal Azad J&K bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Sajawal Khan, Chairman and Raja Muhammad Ashraf Kayani, Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (JAVID IQBAL KHAN Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Chief Secretary and 3 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Kh. Abdus Samad for Appellant.
- Liaqat Hussain Rathore for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Civil servant was removed from service after holding enquiry against him on charges like absence from duty, inefficiency, laziness and bad performance
Appellate Authority, on appeal, recommended that civil servant in view of his-young age be given a fresh chance of service in department and his service career be watched during his probationary period of appointment
Civil servant not satisfied with order of Appellate Authority filed second appeal which was dismissed not being competent and time barred
Civil servant challenged orders of Authorities before Service Tribunal by filing appeal
Civil servant was removed from service by Authority concerned after properly charge-sheeting him
If charges against civil servant on basis of which he was removed from service, were framed and Appellate Authority had not found him innocent, order of Appellate Authority according to which fresh appointment of civil servant was ordered, was not justified-- Portion of service would be excluded from period of service of civil servant in department
Civil servant could not be recommended for lesser punishment-- In absence of cross-appeal on part of Authority against order of Appellate Authority, verdict of Appellate Authority was upheld by Service Tribunal.
Delayed appeal
Only one appeal having been provided to aggrieved civil servant against order of Appointing Authority, civil servant after spending his right of appeal before Additional Commissioner who was Appellate Authority, had no right of second appeal before Secretary, Revenue, but after one appeal, if civil servant was not satisfied with order of Appellate Authority, he should have straightaway come in appeal before Service Tribunal within prescribed period of 30 days from date of order of Appellate authority
Civil servant brought second departmental appeal which was not competent and last period of 30 days provided for an appeal before Tribunal against order of his departmental Appellate Authority
Time spent by civil servant in proceedings of incompetent appeal before wrong forum, could not be condoned
Appeal filed before Tribunal after prescribed period of limitation, was not maintainable and was liable to be dismissed for being time-barred.
Judgment & Decree
(a) Civil service
Civil servant was removed from service after holding enquiry against him on charges like absence from duty, inefficiency, laziness and bad performance
Appellate Authority, on appeal, recommended that civil servant in view of his-young age be given a fresh chance of service in department and his service career be watched during his probationary period of appointment
Civil servant not satisfied with order of Appellate Authority filed second appeal which was dismissed not being competent and time barred
Civil servant challenged orders of Authorities before Service Tribunal by filing appeal
Civil servant was removed from service by Authority concerned after properly charge-sheeting him
If charges against civil servant on basis of which he was removed from service, were framed and Appellate Authority had not found him innocent, order of Appellate Authority according to which fresh appointment of civil servant was ordered, was not justified-- Portion of service would be excluded from period of service of civil servant in department
Civil servant could not be recommended for lesser punishment-- In absence of cross-appeal on part of Authority against order of Appellate Authority, verdict of Appellate Authority was upheld by Service Tribunal. (b) Civil service
Delayed appeal
Only one appeal having been provided to aggrieved civil servant against order of Appointing Authority, civil servant after spending his right of appeal before Additional Commissioner who was Appellate Authority, had no right of second appeal before Secretary, Revenue, but after one appeal, if civil servant was not satisfied with order of Appellate Authority, he should have straightaway come in appeal before Service Tribunal within prescribed period of 30 days from date of order of Appellate authority
Civil servant brought second departmental appeal which was not competent and last period of 30 days provided for an appeal before Tribunal against order of his departmental Appellate Authority
Time spent by civil servant in proceedings of incompetent appeal before wrong forum, could not be condoned
Appeal filed before Tribunal after prescribed period of limitation, was not maintainable and was liable to be dismissed for being time-barred. Kh. Abdus Samad for Appellant. Liaqat Hussain Rathore for Respondents.