1978 PLP [C (PLC(CS))
GHULAM MUSTAFA Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB THROUGH SECRETARY, EDUCATION
| Citation | 1978 PLP [C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | 1978 P L C C.S.T. 29(1) |
| Bench Members | Saad Saood Jan, Chairman, Ashfaq Ali Khan and Khalid Farooq Akbar, |
| Parties | GHULAM MUSTAFA Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB THROUGH SECRETARY, EDUCATION |
| Primary Law | (b) Civil Services Rules (Punjab), Vol. I |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1978 PLP [C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: (b) Civil Services Rules (Punjab), Vol. I as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1978 PLP [C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the 1978 P L C C.S.T. 29(1) bench comprising: Saad Saood Jan, Chairman, Ashfaq Ali Khan and Khalid Farooq Akbar,.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1978 PLP [C (PLC(CS)) (GHULAM MUSTAFA Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB THROUGH SECRETARY, EDUCATION). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
(a) Civil Services Rules (Punjab), Vol. I ‑‑ R. 4.4(a)(ii)‑Promotion to selection grade not involving assumption of duties or responsibilities of greater importance‑Para. (a), cl. (ii) of r. 4.4, held, applicable to case-‑Pay as such rightly fixed at a stage lower than stage at which pay drawn prior to grant of selection grade and difference between two stages rightly given in form of personal pay. --‑‑ R. 4.4‑Relaxation of provisions of r. 4.4‑Tribunal cannot give any directions to competent authority in matter.
Judgment & Decree
SAAD SAOOD JAN (CHAIRMAN).‑A report of the respondents has been con sidered. The relevant rule applicable is 4.4 of the C. S. R., Vol. I, clause (ii) of paragraph (a) of this rule is applicable here for the promotion of the appel lants to the Selection Grade did not involve assumption of duties or responsibilities of greater importance. As such, their pay was rightly fixed at a stage lower than the stage at which they were drawing their pays prior to being granted selection grade. The difference between the two stages was given to them in the form of personal pay. It has, however, been pointed out on behalf of the appellants that in eleven other cases the competent authority had relaxed the provisions of rule 4.4(Ibid) and allowed the promotees the stage at which they were drawing pays before promotion. If this is indeed so, we have no doubt that the res pondents would not like the appellants to be treated differently. This Tribunal cannot give any direction in the matter of relaxation to the competent authority. For the reasons stated above, the appeal is dismissed in limine.