1994 PLP 1947 (SCMR)
and 3 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus GHULAM JILLANI‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1994 PLP 1947 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Shafiur Rahman, Saleem Akhtar |
| Parties | and 3 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus GHULAM JILLANI‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 PLP 1947 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 PLP 1947 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Shafiur Rahman, Saleem Akhtar.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 PLP 1947 (SCMR) (and 3 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus GHULAM JILLANI‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Gulzar Ahmed Qureshi, Advocate instructed by Rao Muhammad Yusuf Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 17th January, 1994.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the Punjab Service Tribunal, Rawalpindi dated 19‑7‑1992 passed in Appeal No. 548 of 1989). ‑‑‑‑Art. 212‑‑‑Making non‑pensionable service pensionable ‑‑‑Notice was issued to respondent as to why petition for leave to appeal be not converted into an appeal and allowed for the reason that in the absence of a notification making non‑pensionable service pensionable, Service Tribunal could not order so of its own on the basis of another notification concerning another and a different ` category of contingent employees whose services were regularized.
Judgment & Decree
GHULAM JILLANI‑‑‑Respondent Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 1051‑L of 1992, decided on 17th January, 1994. (On appeal from the Punjab Service Tribunal, Rawalpindi dated 19‑7‑1992 passed in Appeal No. 548 of 1989). ‑‑‑‑Art. 212‑‑‑Making non‑pensionable service pensionable ‑‑‑Notice was issued to respondent as to why petition for leave to appeal be not converted into an appeal and allowed for the reason that in the absence of a notification making non‑pensionable service pensionable, Service Tribunal could not order so of its own on the basis of another notification concerning another and a different ` category of contingent employees whose services were regularized. Gulzar Ahmed Qureshi, Advocate instructed by Rao Muhammad Yusuf Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners. Nemo for Respondent. Date of hearing: 17th January, 1994. SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.‑‑‑Notice to issue to the respondent why the petition be not converted into an appeal and allowed for the reason that in the absence of a notification making non‑pensionable service pensionable the Service Tribunal could not order so of its own on the basis of another notification concerning another and a different category of contingent employees whose services were regularized. A.A./P‑232/S Order accordingly.