1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Dr. MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ANJUM Versus GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB through Secretary Health
| Citation | 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Raja Afrasiab Khan, J |
| Parties | Dr. MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ANJUM Versus GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB through Secretary Health |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) 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: Raja Afrasiab 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)) (Dr. MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ANJUM Versus GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB through Secretary Health). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Khurshid Ahmad for Petitioner.
- Irfan Qadir, Addl. A: G. for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 114 & 151
Controversy between parties was disposed of by High Court in its earlier order saying that petitioner civil servant's case for his further promotion would be considered by the respondent authority in the light of case of promotion of specified doctors
Petitioner's counsel's statement at that time was that case of petitioner civil servant was at par with those of aforesaid doctors
Stress in review application was that case of petitioner stood at a higher footing than those of the said doctors because of his foreign degree while those doctors were diploma holders
Petitioner claimed to have a vested right under the law to be considered by the respondent for his further promotion
Petitioner's counsel stressed that no concession whatsoever was given to petitioner by Government Law Officer when the earlier order was passed
Law Officer had stated in Court that he did not make the statement that Secretary Health was ready to consider petitioner's case for his further promotion
Court found by reference to record that no concession whatever, was given by Government Law Officer to the petitioner in that behalf
Statement attributed to Law Officer regarding concession thus was of no significance
Government Law Officer had also sworn affidavit that he had made no such statement
Government Law Officer having given no concession to petitioner, his case pertaining to promotion had to be considered on its own merits according to law
Petitioner's case was thus, directed to be considered by the authority in accordance with law and disposed of within specified period.
Judgment & Decree
GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB through Secretary Health Review Application No. 29 of 1991 in Writ Petition No. 30 of 1991, decided on 11th May, 1991.
Ss. 114 & 151
Controversy between parties was disposed of by High Court in its earlier order saying that petitioner civil servant's case for his further promotion would be considered by the respondent authority in the light of case of promotion of specified doctors
Petitioner's counsel's statement at that time was that case of petitioner civil servant was at par with those of aforesaid doctors
Stress in review application was that case of petitioner stood at a higher footing than those of the said doctors because of his foreign degree while those doctors were diploma holders
Petitioner claimed to have a vested right under the law to be considered by the respondent for his further promotion
Petitioner's counsel stressed that no concession whatsoever was given to petitioner by Government Law Officer when the earlier order was passed
Law Officer had stated in Court that he did not make the statement that Secretary Health was ready to consider petitioner's case for his further promotion
Court found by reference to record that no concession whatever, was given by Government Law Officer to the petitioner in that behalf
Statement attributed to Law Officer regarding concession thus was of no significance
Government Law Officer had also sworn affidavit that he had made no such statement
Government Law Officer having given no concession to petitioner, his case pertaining to promotion had to be considered on its own merits according to law
Petitioner's case was thus, directed to be considered by the authority in accordance with law and disposed of within specified period. Ch. Khurshid Ahmad for Petitioner. Irfan Qadir, Addl. A: G. for Respondent.