1977 PLP [G (PLC(CS))
Raja MUHAMMAD ASHRAF Versus SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN,
| Citation | 1977 PLP [G (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Federal Service Tribunal |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Raja MUHAMMAD ASHRAF Versus SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1977 PLP [G (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1977 PLP [G (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Federal Service Tribunal bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1977 PLP [G (PLC(CS)) (Raja MUHAMMAD ASHRAF Versus SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
Warning ‑‑ Civil servant transferred and warned to desist from certain activities‑Such warning not a censure" and not a "penalty Government Servants Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973, r. 3. (b) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)‑
Judgment & Decree
Warning ‑‑ Civil servant transferred and warned to desist from certain activities‑Such warning not a censure" and not a "penalty Government Servants Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973, r. 3. (b) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)‑
S. 4(1) (b)‑Appeal‑Transfer order‑‑Not appeal able. MUHAMMAD DAUD KHAN (CHAIRMAN).‑‑Raja Mohammad Ashraf, an Assistant Teacher. Cantonment Primary School, Saddar Bazar, Rawalpindi, took ' up on himself in his capacity as President of the Cantonment Board Teachers' Association, to report against Director of Military Lands and Can tonment, for forging signatures of Station Commander on the substituted list of selected teachers. Thereafter he approached the Chief of Staff with the same complaint. He was charge‑sheeted and after consideration of his defence‑statement, which was found unsatisfactory, he was served with a show‑cause notice dated 12th June, 1976. The charge was as to misconduct under rule 3(b) of the Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973. On 25th September 1976 it was decided to transfer him to Shorkot Cantt. School. He was also warned to desist from such activities in future. He filed this appeal against his transfer and alleged warning. Although censure is a minor penalty, the warning in the form it was, given is not tantamount to any penalty imposed. He was just directed to desist from misconduct in future. It cannot be deemed to be censure for the acts committed within the meaning of Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973. As to transfer, section 4(1)(b) of the Service Tribunal3 Act, 1973 denies appeal against such postings. Wording of the section that no appeal right of shall lie against determination of a departmental authority deciding fitness of a person to be appointed or to hold a particular post, negatives right of appeal. The appeal, therefore, is incompetent under both the heads. It is dismissed in limine.