1991 PLP 395 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD YOUSAF — Petitioner Versus THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, through The Chairman/Secretary, Railway Board, Ministry of Railways and another — Respondents
| Citation | 1991 PLP 395 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Shafiur Rahman and Rustam S. Sidhwa, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD YOUSAF — Petitioner Versus THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, through The Chairman/Secretary, Railway Board, Ministry of Railways and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 395 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 395 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Shafiur Rahman and Rustam S. Sidhwa, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 395 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD YOUSAF — Petitioner Versus THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, through The Chairman/Secretary, Railway Board, Ministry of Railways 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: 21st February, 1990.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, dated 2-8-1989 passed in Appeal No.275/R of 1988).
Art. 212(3)
Civil servant of Grade-16 was called upon to perform functions of the post in Grade-17
Civil servant while so posted claimed full pay of the post ii Grade-17 and entitlement of A.C.C. class for travelling
Since Tribunal found that civil servant was not in fact promoted but was holding the current charge of post in Grade-17 and was not entitled to benefits claimed by him
Civil servant could not show that he was promoted in the manner prescribed by the Rules-- Order relied upon by civil servant showed that his transfer had taken place on his own pay
No question of law of public importance was involved in the case-- Question of fact was, however, involved on which positive finding had been recorded by Service Tribunal after obtaining comments of respondents and hearing the parties
Leave to appeal was refused in circumstances
Civil servant was however, allowed to seek revival of petition, if he considered necessary, within sixty days of the disposal of his service appeal filed by him before Service Tribunal, if he considered that as a consequence of such decision his entitlement was strengthened or improved. Petitioner in person.
Judgment & Decree
SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.‑‑‑The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal dated 2‑8‑1989 whereby his service appeal was dismissed.
2. The petitioner was an officer of Grade‑16 when he was called upon in July, 1988 to perform the functions of the post of Assistant Personnel Officer (APO) in Grade‑
17. While so posted, he made the following claims which were denied to him:‑ (i) Full pay of the post in Grade‑17. (ii) Entitlement of the A.C.C. class for travelling. He moved the Service Tribunal where it was found that he was not in fact prompted but was holding the current charge of the post and was not entitled to what he was demanding.
3. The petitioner who appeared in person, has not been able to place before us any document showing that he was promoted in the manner prescribed by the rules. On the contrary the Order relied upon by him shows that his transfer has taken place on his own pay. He was according to the Tribunal's finding, holding current charge of the post. He was not regularly promoted as such. The petitioner stated before us that he has another service appeal pending before the Tribunal which is Appeal No.217(R)/1988 and relates to the nature of promotion and the entitlement thereon. According to him, the decision of that Appeal should have preceded the one against which the Petition is now being considered.
4. Be that as it may, for the present we do not consider it to be a case where any question of law of public importance arises. On the contrary, a question of fact was involved on which a positive finding has been recorded by the Tribunal after obtaining the comments of the respondents and hearing the parties. However, in order to protect the interest of the petitioner, while refusing leave to appeal, we allow the petitioner that he may seek revival of this Petition, if he considers necessary, within sixty days of the disposal of the Service Appeal No.217(R)/11)88 filed by him before the Tribunal, if he considers that as a consequence; of such a decision his entitlement is strengthened or improved. A.A./M‑1288/S Leave refused.