PLC(CS) 1992

1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

RAZIA QURESHI Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore High Court
Decided Date
Writ Petition No.7003 of 1991, decided on 25th August, 1991.
Honorable Judges
Gul Zarin Kiani, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Forum / Court Lahore High Court
Bench Members Gul Zarin Kiani, J
Parties RAZIA QURESHI Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB
Primary Law Punjab Civil Servants Act (VIII of 1974)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?

This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Civil Servants Act (VIII of 1974) 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: Gul Zarin Kiani, 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)) (RAZIA QURESHI Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Punjab Civil Servants Act (VIII of 1974)

Representation

  • Muhammad Rashid Malik for petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 9

Transfer

Transfer of a civil servant was essentially an incidence of service

In absence of a term in contract of service or a binding rule of service, and every civil servant in accordance with express provisions of S.9 of the Act, was liable to serve within or beyond Province in any part under Provincial or Federal Government as the case might be

Consideration of convenience apart a civil servant, had no vested right in him to stay at a particular station of his choice for any number of years.

Judgment & Decree

Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB Writ Petition No.7003 of 1991, decided on 25th August, 1991.

S. 9

Transfer

Transfer of a civil servant was essentially an incidence of service

In absence of a term in contract of service or a binding rule of service, and every civil servant in accordance with express provisions of S.9 of the Act, was liable to serve within or beyond Province in any part under Provincial or Federal Government as the case might be

Consideration of convenience apart a civil servant, had no vested right in him to stay at a particular station of his choice for any number of years. Muhammad Rashid Malik for petitioner.