1989SCMR750 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD ASHRAF CHAUDHRY — Petitioner Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary,
| Citation | 1989SCMR750 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Nasim Hasan Shah and Usman Ali Shah, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASHRAF CHAUDHRY — Petitioner Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, |
| Primary Law | Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989SCMR750 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989SCMR750 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah and Usman Ali Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989SCMR750 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD ASHRAF CHAUDHRY — Petitioner Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sadiq Muhammad Warraich, Advocate Supreme Court and Manzoor Elahi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- M.Bilal, Deputy Attorney-General for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 14th December, 1988.
- Sadiq Muhammad Warraich, Advocate Supreme Court and Manzoor Elahi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- M.Bilal, Deputy Attorney‑General for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 27-6-1988 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad in Appeal No.217(R) of 1987). --R. 3(2)--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212(3)--Promotion of civil servant--Entitlement--Petitioner's record found to be "average" as per official files--Annual Confidential Report, for the last three years showed the remark "not fit for promotion"--Conscious decision was also taken by the Department not to recommend the petitioner for promotion--Petition for leave to appeal against order of Service Tribunal was rejected in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Sadiq Muhammad Warraich, Advocate Supreme Court and Manzoor Elahi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. M.Bilal, Deputy Attorney‑General for Respondents. Date of hearing: 14th December, 1988. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.‑‑Notice was issued to the Deputy Attorney General to hear him in answer to the submission of the petitioner made on the previous date of hearing which was noticed in the following words:‑‑ "Submits that the view of the Service Tribunal that since the petitioner had submitted an application requesting for being considered for promotion (page 17 of the Paper Book) and no reply having been received thereto indicated that the petitioner's request for promotion had been considered and rejected is not tenable. In fact, the petitioner's case had to be considered under the Rules and a conscious decision taken thereon before any outsider could be considered for the post in question." The officials of the Department have shown us the official files from which it is evident that the petitioner's record was "average" and in the Annual Confidential Reports for the last three years it was remarked "not fit for promotion". We are further informed that a conscious decision was taken by the Department not to recommend the petitioner for promotion to a Grade‑19 post. Not a fit case for interference by this Court. Dismissed. AA./M‑712/S Petition dismissed.