2010 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
BOOTA MASIH Versus DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH and 2 others
| Citation | 2010 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Federal Service Tribunal |
| Bench Members | Justice (R.) Tanveer Bashir Ansari, Chairman and Syed Mehar Hussain Shah, Member |
| Parties | BOOTA MASIH Versus DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH and 2 others |
| Primary Law | Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Federal Service Tribunal bench comprising: Justice (R.) Tanveer Bashir Ansari, Chairman and Syed Mehar Hussain Shah, Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (BOOTA MASIH Versus DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH and 2 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sana Ullah Noor Ghauri for Appellant.
- Mukhtar Ahmed Mughal, Federal Counsel for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 21st February, 2009.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 4
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.17
Appellant was removed from service as a result of disciplinary action
Said order of removal from service was set aside in appeal filed by the appellant and appellant was directed to be reinstated on the same position from which he was removed from service
When the appellant stood removed from service, authorities had granted Selection Grade to at least 10 juniors of the appellant, but due to his removal from service appellant could not be considered for grant of said Selection Grade
Appellant had filed appeal against the order whereby his request for grant of Selection Grade was rejected
As appellant was ordered to be reinstated in service on the same position from which he was removed from service, upon reinstatement the seniority and all other incidental rights/prospects of service would be restored in favour of the appellant
Grant of Selection Grade, however depended upon the particular percentage of posts upon seniority basis
No illegality was found for the grant of Selection Grade to the 10 juniors of the appellant at the time when the appellant stood removed from service--Grant of Selection Grade to the juniors of the appellant would create a vested right in them even though the appellant might have been reinstated in service
Case of grant of Selection Grade to the appellant could be considered only if any selection grade post as per rules was still available without disturbing the status of the juniors who had since been granted the Selection Grade.?
Judgment & Decree
MR. JUSTICE (R) TANVEER BASHIR ANSARI, (CHAIRMAN).
This appeal is directed against the order dated 1-9-2003 whereby the request of the appellant for the grant of selection grade was rejected.
2. Briefly the facts are that the appellant was employed as Charge Nurse when he was removed from service vide order dated 8-12-2000 as result of disciplinary action. The appellant filed service appeal No.72(K)CS/2001 which was accepted vide judgment dated 28-2-2003. The order of removal from service was set aside and the appellant was directed to be reinstated "on the same position from which he was removed from service."
3. The appellant had initially joined the department w.e.f. 22-10-1999 as Charge Nurse (BS-14). While the appellant stood removed from service w.e.f. 8-12-2000, the respondents had granted selection grade to at least ten junior Charge Nurses vide order dated 29-8-2001. Obviously while the appellant had been removed from service, he could not be considered for the grant of selection grade.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have extensively perused the record.
5. As hereinbefore observed, the appellant was ordered to be reinstated in service "on the same position from which he was removed from service". Upon reinstatement the seniority and all other incidental rights/prospects of service would be restored in favour of the appellant.
6. The grant of selection grade however, depends upon the particular percentage of posts upon seniority basis. We do not find any illegality for the grant of selection grade to the 10 juniors of the appellant at a time when the appellant stood removed from service. The grant of selection grade to the juniors of the appellant shall create a vested right in them even though the appellant might have been reinstated in service. The case of grant of selection grade to the appellant can be considered only if any selection grade post as per rules was still available without disturbing the status of the juniors who have since been granted the selection grade. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. H.B.T./14/FST???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Order accordingly.