1998 PLP 2369 (SCMR)
Professor MUMTAZ ALI KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Establishment Division, Islamabad and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1998 PLP 2369 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Saleem Akhtar and Fazal Karim, JJ |
| Parties | Professor MUMTAZ ALI KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Establishment Division, Islamabad and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 2369 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 2369 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Saleem Akhtar and Fazal Karim, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP 2369 (SCMR) (Professor MUMTAZ ALI KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Establishment Division, Islamabad and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M. Kowkab Iqbal, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 11th March, 1996
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 30‑8‑1995 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad passed in Appeal No.250(R) of 1995). ‑‑‑‑S. 9‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)‑‑‑Promotion‑‑ Entitlement‑‑‑Civil servant having failed to come up to qualifying score, post in question went to respondent, his junior‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Civil servant contended that he belonged to specialist cadre, therefore, instructions contained in Parts II and III of Guidelines for Departmental Promotion Committee were wrongly applied to him‑‑‑Said contention was repelled by Service Tribunal‑‑‑Civil servant had called Supreme Court's attention to Part IV of those guidelines to point out that such part itself had excluded application of Parts II and III to civil servants who were in specialist. cadres such as doctors, teachers, research scientists and incumbents of purely technical posts for promotion within their own line of specialism ‑‑‑Leave to appeal to Supreme Court was granted to consider contentions raised by civil servant.
Judgment & Decree
FAZAL KARIM, J.
The petitioner is an Associate Professor in BPS-19. According to him he was the senior most Associate Professor when a post in B-20 fell vacant. He was considered but "failed to come up to the qualifying score" and the post went to Mr. Sajjad Akbar respondent, who was admittedly junior to the petitioner. One of the contentions raised before the Tribunal was that the petitioner belongs to the specialist cadres and the instructions contained in Parts II and III of the Guidelines for Departmental Promotion Committee/Central Selection Board were wrongly applied to him. That contention was repelled by the Tribunal with the observation that the petitioner had "failed to explain that as Principal of the Federal Government College, Cantt. Board how he fell within the cadre of "specialists" to claim exemption of Parts II and III ". Learned counsel for the petitioner has called our attention to Part IV of those guidelines to point out that that part itself excludes the application of Parts II and III "to civil servants who are in specialist cadres such as doctors, teachers and professors, research scientists and incumbents of purely technical posts for promotion within their own line of specialism".
2. Leave to appeal is granted, inter alia, to consider *his contention. A.A./M-142/S Leave granted.