Home Maxims & Terms Distinction elaborated meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Distinction elaborated

Distinction elaborated legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

2015 PLC(CS) 411 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
Art. 199Punjab Civil .Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974, R.22Constitutional petitionCivil Service

Regularization of ad hoc appointment of the petitioner against the post of Senior Registrar (Surgery) (BS-18) on the basis of length of service

Scope

"Ad hoc appointment" and "appointment by promotion"

Distinction elaborated

Petitioner was aggrieved of his termination and promotion of respondent as Senior Registrar Surgery (BS-18) on acting charge basis by respondent's adjustment against the post vacated by termination of ad hoc appointment of petitioner

Validity

Respondent's promotion on the recommendation of Departmental Promotion Committee created a vested right in his favour and such incumbent could be promoted to the higher scale on availability of a vacant post, which was admittedly occupied by the petitioner as a stop-gap arrangement

Respondent after having been promoted was adjusted against the said post, which had not infringed any of the Fundamental Rights of the petitioner

Promotion of respondent against the post of Senior Registrar Surgery (BS-18) was to be considered as a regular appointment and petitioner could not claim continuation of his ad hoc appointment against the post in presence of promotion of respondent on the recommendations of a duly constituted departmental promotion committee as approved by the competent authority

Constitutional petition was declined in circumstances.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Distinction elaborated", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124953671

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Distinction elaborated"

CLC 2000
Civil Revision No.831 of 2000, decided on 28th April, 2000.

2000 C L C 1611

Messrs JAVED & CO. ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Messrs DAEWOO PAKISTAN MOTORWAY SERVICES LTD.

Court: Lahore
PLC(CS) 2015
Writ Petition No.6735 of 2014, decided on 29th October, 2014.

2015 P L C (C

Dr. RAB NAWAZ MALIK Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and others

Court: Lahore High Court
CLC 1989
Civil Miscellanous Petition No.l of 1989, decided on 17th June, 1989.

1989A214

Present: Raja Muhammad Khurshid Khan, CJ. And Sardar Said Muhammad Khan, J Versus AZAD JAMMU & KASHMIR MINERAL AND INDUSTRIAL

Court: ‑‑‑Ss.33 & 2(c)‑‑"Court"‑‑Meaning‑‑Word "Court" appearing in S.33 read with S.2(c) would mean a Civil Court having jurisdiction to decide question forming the subject‑matter of the reference if the same had been made the subject‑matter of the suit‑‑Only such Court would have jurisdiction to resolve the controversy between the parties in which an award had been filed or may be filed and no other Court‑‑Court which would have jurisdiction to try a civil suit would have jurisdiction in respect of the question forming the subject‑matter of a. reference.‑ Words and phrases.
PLD 1994
Civil Appeals Nos. 1266, 1267 and 1268 of 1990, decided on 6th March 1994

P L D 1994 Supreme Court 539

MUHAMMAD ANIS and others‑‑‑Appellants Versus ABDUL HASEEB and others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: ‑‑‑‑S. 4(d)‑‑‑Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973), S. 9‑‑‑Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973, Rr.8 & 8‑A‑‑ Promotion ‑‑‑Eligibility and fitness of civil servant‑‑‑Term "eligibility" and "fitness"‑‑‑Connotation‑‑‑Question of eligibility is different than question of fitness for promotion‑‑‑Question of eligibility relates primarily to the terms and conditions of the service and their applicability to the civil servant concerned and, therefore, Service Tribunal has jurisdiction in the matter‑‑‑Question of fitness is a subjective evaluation on the basis of objective criteria when substitution for an opinion of the competent authority is not possible by that of Service Tribunal or of a Court, and therefore, Service Tribunal has no jurisdiction on the question of fitness.‑‑Words and phrases.
PLC(CS) 1994
Civil Appeals Nos. 1266,1267 and 1268 of 1990, decided on‑6th March 1994.

1994 P L C (C

MUHAMMAD ANIS and others Versus ABDUL HASEEB and others

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
MLD 2018
2017-October-31

2018 M L D 802

H. NIZAM DIN AND SONS (PVT.) LTD. through Authorized representative — Plaintiff Versus PAKISTAN DEFENCE OFFICERS HOUSING AUTHORITY through Secretary and 2 others — Defendants

Court: Sindh
PLD 1961
Appeal No. 2 of 1960‑61, decided on 1 st November 1960, District Lahore.

P L D 1961 W

COMPANY GROUP 'B', LYALLPUR‑Appellant Versus REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, LAHORE.

Court:
PLD 1961
Review Petition No. 42 of 1956‑57, decided on 2nd July 1960, District Montgomery.

P L D 1961 W P (Rev

BARKAT ALI‑Petitioner Versus GHAFFAR AHMAD‑Respondent

Court:
SCMR 1993
Shariat Review Petition No.1‑R (S) of 1989, decided on 14th December, 1991.

1993 S C M R 1697

(LAW AND JUSTICE) DIVISION‑‑Petitioner Versus QAZALBASH WAQF, LAHORE and 26 others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
PCRLJ 2012
2011-June-8

2012 P Cr

MUHAMMAD KHALID — Petitioner Versus STATION HOUSE OFFICER and others — Respondents

Court: Lahore