1991 PLP 1127 (SCMR)
MANZOOR ULLAH — Petitioner Versus SABIR ZAMEER SIDDIQUI and another — Respondents
| Citation | 1991 PLP 1127 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Shafiur Rahman, Zaffar Hussain Mirza, |
| Parties | MANZOOR ULLAH — Petitioner Versus SABIR ZAMEER SIDDIQUI and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil service |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 1127 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil service as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 1127 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Shafiur Rahman, Zaffar Hussain Mirza,.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 1127 (SCMR) (MANZOOR ULLAH — Petitioner Versus SABIR ZAMEER SIDDIQUI and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 20th March, 1991.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment dated 21-11-1990 passed in Civil Appeal No. 673/90).
Direct recruit
Claim of seniority over a direct recruit in higher grade
Promotions having been made in violation of the Rules have to be revised in consultation with the appropriate Selecting Authority/Departmental Promotion Committee with a view to conform to the Rules as were in existence when the vacancies were available or where the promotion was sought to be made
Till the regularisation of such promotion took place, civil servant could not claim seniority over a direct recruit in a higher grade. Petitioner in person.
Judgment & Decree
Petitioner in person. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 20th March, 1991. SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.‑‑‑Mr. Manzoor Ullah has made two grievances for seeking review of the judgment. In the first place the copy of the judgment does not show his presence as respondent No.4 in the title, though he was also present in person and had argued the case. We have seen the original judgment. It does mention his presence in person. Necessary correction be made in the copy.
2. As regards the merits, his contention is with regard to the denial of seniority as against appellant Sabir Zamir Siddiqui. The review Petition appears to be misconceived because the question of his seniority in the lower grade stands determined on account of the judgment in Inayat Ali and another v. Manzoorullah and another 1987 S. Q M R
407. In the higher grade Dr. Sabir Zamir Siddiqui happened to be a direct recruit. As against him Mr. Manzoor Ullah could not claim seniority because on account of our judgment in Civil Appeals Nos. 190 of 1988 and 191 of 1988 (Muhammad Ibrahim Azad v. The Secretary, Government of the Punjab and 4 others) belonging to the same department, we have held that promotions were all made in violation of the rules on the subject and they have to be revised in consultation with the appropriate selecting authority/Departmental Promotion Committee with a view to conform to the rules as were in existence when the vacancies were available or when the promotion was sought to be made. Till the regularisation of such promotion takes place, the petitioner cannot claim seniority over a direct recruit m a higher grade.
3. On merits no case is made out for review, which is hereby dismissed. M.B.A./M‑1493/S Petition dismissed.