1976 PLP [C (PLC(CS))
KUSLOMAL Versus PROVINCE OF SIND THROUGH SECRETARY REVENUE, BOARD OF
| Citation | 1976 PLP [C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | 1976 P L C C. S. T. 132(2) |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | KUSLOMAL Versus PROVINCE OF SIND THROUGH SECRETARY REVENUE, BOARD OF |
| Primary Law | Sind Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1976 PLP [C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Sind Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1976 PLP [C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the 1976 P L C C. S. T. 132(2) bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1976 PLP [C (PLC(CS)) (KUSLOMAL Versus PROVINCE OF SIND THROUGH SECRETARY REVENUE, BOARD OF). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Aftab Ahmed Shaikh for Appellant.
- Abdul Sattar G. Shaikh Asstt. A: G. for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 4, proviso‑Scope‑Inclusion of name in fit list ‑Mukhtiarkar claiming seniority on basis of select list‑Name not included in select list‑Matter, held, involving question of fitness for a particular post, hence beyond jurisdiction of Tribunal.
Judgment & Decree
HAMZO KHAN M. KURESHI (CHAIRMAN).‑Heard Mr. Aftab Shaikh for the appellant. He claims his seniority as a Mukhtiarkar on the basis of a select list of Mukhtiarkars prepared by the Board of Revenue in 1959. He concedes that the appellant's name was not included in that select list. If his name was not included in the select list he cannot claim seniority on the basis of that list. This Tribunal will have no jurisdiction to order inclusion of the appellant's name in the select list because it is a question of fitness for a particular post which is beyond own jurisdiction. The appeal is accordingly dismissed for want of jurisdiction.