2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
BILQEES AKHTAR Versus DIRECTOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS (EE) PUNJAB, LAHORE and another
| Citation | 2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Hamid Ali Mirza and Karamat Nazir Bhandari, JJ |
| Parties | BILQEES AKHTAR Versus DIRECTOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS (EE) PUNJAB, LAHORE and another |
| Primary Law | Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Hamid Ali Mirza and Karamat Nazir Bhandari, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (BILQEES AKHTAR Versus DIRECTOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS (EE) PUNJAB, LAHORE and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 30th September, 2003.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 23-12-2002 in Appeal No.2106 of 2002 passed by Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore).
S.4
Impugned order was passed on 13-12-2000
Appeal was filed on 29-8-2002
Service Tribunal dismissed appeal being barred by time. Petitioner in person.
Judgment & Decree
HAMID ALI MIRZA, J.
Heard the petitioner in person. Petitioner submits that learned Service Tribunal has erred in holding that the appeal was barred by time.
2. We do not find substance and merit in the said contention. The impugned order dated 13-12-2000 was passed by Director, Elementary Education, Rawalpindi whereby the petitioner was reinstated but her intervening period was treated as leave without pay. The petitioner preferred appeal against the order of the Director, Elementary Education, Rawalpindi with regard to non-payment of her salary in respect of intervening period before the Punjab Service Tribunal on 29-8-2002 when the impugned order was passed on 13-12-2000 thus the filing of appeal was grossly time-barred, considering that filing of belated departmental representation to the Director, Education Punjab, Lahore which too was not maintainable as there was no such provision or second appeal under the rules.
3. In the circumstance we find no legal or factual infirmity with the impugned order, hence leave to appeal is declined and the petition is dismissed. S.A.K./B-104/SC Leave refused.