Al Wakeelo logo

Al Wakeelo

Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty

Initializing Secure Chambers

1992 PLC(CS) 697

KHUDA BAKHSH AWAN VS CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB

Petitioner: KHUDA BAKHSH AWAN VS Respondent: CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB

Court: FEDERAL-SERVICE-TRIBUNAL

Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

1992 P L C (C

1992 P L C (C.S.) 697

[Federal Service Tribunal]

Before S.M. Ishaq and Ch. Hasan Nawaz, Members

Malik KHUDA BAKHSH AWAN

versus

CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB and 2 others

Appeal No. 82(L) of 1990, decided on 12th December, 1991.

Civil Service--

----Adverse remarks---Instructions of Guide to Performance Evaluation, No.2.28---Confidential report was required to be written by an officer if period of report was three months or more than three months---Such period of three months under report or review, should be actual period of duty---If an officer either goes on training or was otherwise absent, for a specific period, that period of absence, whatever be its reason, should be excluded while computing minimum period of three months---Such instructions which had left little room for any doubt regarding fulfillment of condition of minimum period of three months, not being a mere formality, concerned officer's failure to comply with those instructions in making performance evaluation, would render confidential reports valueless---Where period under report admittedly was less than three months report and adverse remarks made by reporting and countersigning officers against civil servant were irrelevant and should not be treated as adverse---Countersigning officer according to instructions was to underline in red ink remarks which in his opinion were adverse, but he failed to comply with that instruction---Adverse remarks, in circumstances, made against Civil servant by reporting officer and countersigning officer, were not justified and were liable to be expunged from evaluation report of civil servant for disputed period.

Mushtaq Masood for Appellant.

Manzoor Hussain District Attorney for Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.

Hafiz Tariq Naseem for Respondent No. 3.

Date of hearing. 5th December, 1991.

Related Legal Research & Directories