1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Ch. MUBASHIR AHMAD, D.S.P., SPECIAL BRANCH, LAHORE Versus INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE, PUNJAB and 2 others
| Citation | 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Irshad Hasan Khan, J |
| Parties | Ch. MUBASHIR AHMAD, D.S.P., SPECIAL BRANCH, LAHORE Versus INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE, PUNJAB and 2 others |
| Primary Law | Civil service |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil service 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: Irshad Hasan 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)) (Ch. MUBASHIR AHMAD, D.S.P., SPECIAL BRANCH, LAHORE Versus INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE, PUNJAB and 2 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Pervaiz Akhtar for Petitioner.
- Rana Muhammad Arshad, Addl. A: G. for Respondents (on Court's call).
- ----Annual Confidential Report---Non-countersigning by respondent official-- Remedy---High Court directed Advocate-General to bring the order of Court to the notice of respondents forthwith to ensure that Annual Confidential Report in question was placed before appropriate Selection Board when case of petitioner was considered for promotion alongwith others.
Headnotes / Summary
Non-countersigning by respondent official-- Remedy
High Court directed Advocate-General to bring the order of Court to the notice of respondents forthwith to ensure that Annual Confidential Report in question was placed before appropriate Selection Board when case of petitioner was considered for promotion alongwith others. Piecemeal consideration of cases of the concerned employees for promotion by the Departmental Selection Committee concerned would lead to undue frustration amongst the Government servants. It would also encourage litigation and choke the courts/tribunals with business. Earnest efforts should, therefore, be made by all concerned to avoid the factors, which lead to such litigation, in the public interest and also to avoid burden on the public exchequer in defending such petty disputes at State expenses but otherwise have a direct bearing on the future prospects of an employee. It is expected that in future the time schedule laid down by the Government through various instructions/standing orders issued from time to time for recording of Annual Confidential. Reports would be strictly adhered to.
Judgment & Decree
INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE, PUNJAB and 2 others Writ Petition No. 3266 of 1992, decided on 18th April, 1992.
Non-countersigning by respondent official-- Remedy
High Court directed Advocate-General to bring the order of Court to the notice of respondents forthwith to ensure that Annual Confidential Report in question was placed before appropriate Selection Board when case of petitioner was considered for promotion alongwith others. Piecemeal consideration of cases of the concerned employees for promotion by the Departmental Selection Committee concerned would lead to undue frustration amongst the Government servants. It would also encourage litigation and choke the courts/tribunals with business. Earnest efforts should, therefore, be made by all concerned to avoid the factors, which lead to such litigation, in the public interest and also to avoid burden on the public exchequer in defending such petty disputes at State expenses but otherwise have a direct bearing on the future prospects of an employee. It is expected that in future the time schedule laid down by the Government through various instructions/standing orders issued from time to time for recording of Annual Confidential. Reports would be strictly adhered to. Pervaiz Akhtar for Petitioner. Rana Muhammad Arshad, Addl. A: G. for Respondents (on Court's call).