1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Mallick MUHAMMAD ASLAM Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND
| Citation | 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Service Tribunal Azad J&K |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Sajawal Khan, Chairman and Raja Muhammad Ashraf Khan Kayani, Member |
| Parties | Mallick MUHAMMAD ASLAM Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND |
| Primary Law | Civil service |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil service as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Service Tribunal Azad J&K bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Sajawal Khan, Chairman and Raja Muhammad Ashraf Khan Kayani, Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (Mallick MUHAMMAD ASLAM Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sardar Rafique Mahmood for Appellant.
- Nemo for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Civil servant, who originally was appointed as Patwari in Custodian Department, was subsequently transferred and posted in Revenue Department as Girdawar by Commissioner of Revenue Department
Order of such appointment of civil servant was challenged by opposing civil servants in appeal before Secretary, Revenue who set aside order of Commissioner of Revenue Department and remanded case to Collector concerned for fresh orders after hearing parties
Civil servant admittedly had not joined earlier service of Revenue Department before his entry of service in Custodian Department
In fact civil servant was recommended by Commissioner, Revenue Department to be appointed as Patwari in Custodian Department' and such recommendation of Revenue Commissioner was not a regular order of appointment in favour of civil servant
Civil servant admittedly had misstated actual facts about entry of his service in Revenue Department
Civil servant, in fact, was taken in service of Revenue Department as Girdawar for the first time by Commissioner, Revenue Department which order was vacated by Secretary, Revenue on appeal under order challenged
Order of Appellate Authority which otherwise was in accordance with relevant Rules and was not suffering from any legal infirmity, could not be interfered with.
Judgment & Decree
KASHMIR through Chief Secretary and 3 others Service Appeal No.465 of 1989, decided on 26th December, 1991.
Civil servant, who originally was appointed as Patwari in Custodian Department, was subsequently transferred and posted in Revenue Department as Girdawar by Commissioner of Revenue Department
Order of such appointment of civil servant was challenged by opposing civil servants in appeal before Secretary, Revenue who set aside order of Commissioner of Revenue Department and remanded case to Collector concerned for fresh orders after hearing parties
Civil servant admittedly had not joined earlier service of Revenue Department before his entry of service in Custodian Department
In fact civil servant was recommended by Commissioner, Revenue Department to be appointed as Patwari in Custodian Department' and such recommendation of Revenue Commissioner was not a regular order of appointment in favour of civil servant
Civil servant admittedly had misstated actual facts about entry of his service in Revenue Department
Civil servant, in fact, was taken in service of Revenue Department as Girdawar for the first time by Commissioner, Revenue Department which order was vacated by Secretary, Revenue on appeal under order challenged
Order of Appellate Authority which otherwise was in accordance with relevant Rules and was not suffering from any legal infirmity, could not be interfered with. Sardar Rafique Mahmood for Appellant. Nemo for Respondents.