Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: LATIF LODHI VS Respondent: SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, FOOD DEPARTMENT, LAHORE
1992 P L C (C
1992 P L C (C.S.) 621
[Service Tribunal Punjab)
Before Abdul Hamid Khan, Member
LATIF LODHI
Versus
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, FOOD DEPARTMENT, LAHORE and another
Appeal No. 212 of 1989, decided on 31st March, 1991.
(a) Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974---
-----R. 22---Ad hoc appointment---After appointment of civil servant was deemed to have been made on ad hoc basis, question of his eligibility would become irrelevant and unnecessary because under Rule 22 of Rules, requirement of eligibility for ad hoc appointment was of same order as that for regular appointment, meaning thereby that a person could be appointed on ad hoc basis only if he was eligible for regular appointment.
(b) Words and phrases---
---- Term `established' denotes to prove, confirm, verify and to put beyond doubt or dispute.
(c) West Pakistan Delegation of Powers (Relaxation of Age) Rules, 1961---
----Relaxation in age limit---Relaxation of 7 years in age limit of civil servant granted by- Chief Minister had been challenged on ground that under Delegation of Powers Rules, 1961, maximum limit of relaxation in age had been prescribed upto 5 years, thus relaxation of 7 years granted to civil servant by Chief Minister, was in excess of prescribed limit---Maximum relaxation of 5 years prescribed under Rules 1961 was with reference to powers of delegatees i.e. Administrative Secretaries, Heads of Attached Departments, Divisional Commissioners etc. but there was no such limit or fetters placed on powers of rule-making authority which was Chief Minister or Governor of Province-- Relaxation given by Chief Minister of Province in case of civil servant thus was perfectly valid and could not be called in excess of what was permissible under Rules.
Hashmat Ali Nasim v. Government of the Punjab 1981 PLC 502 ref.
(d) Civil service---
----Reinstatement---Acquiescence--Earlier appointment of respondent civil servant and his reinstatement made after his termination which otherwise were validly made by competent authority admittedly neither were challenged by appellant civil servant at appropriate time nor he contested the appeal-- Appellant by his conduct had acquiesced in the matter.
1989 PLC (C.S.) 79 ref.
(e) Civil service--
----"Supersede" ---Meaning---"Supersede," means, to obliterate, set aside, annul, replace, make void, repeal.
(f) Civil service---
---- Term `reinstatement' means to reinstall, re-establish or restore, person or thing to its former state or condition.
Black's Law Dictionary and Standard Oxford English Dictionary ref.
(g) Civil service---
----Promotion---Government has unfettered powers to grant retrospective date to regularise a civil servant working against a post---Regularisation per se of civil servant's promotion retrospectively thus was neither irregular nor illegal.
Hashmat Ali Nasim v. Government of the Punjab 1981 PLC (C.S.) 502 ref.
(h) Judicial review---
---- Judicial review of order was totally distinguishable from administrative review of Authority which had earlier passed original order---No restriction was imposed on competent Authority to make an administrative review of its own decisions.
Sabir Ahmad Chaudhry v. The Province of East Pakistan and another PLD 1960 Dacca 1025 ref.
(i) Judicial review---
---- Judicial and administrative review---Distinction---Action of Authority, taken under MLR 21 under the Constitution (8th Amendment) Act, 1985, was not open to judicial review and it would not even by implication place any restriction on competent Authority to make an administrative review of its own decisions.
Sabir Ahmad Chaudhry v. The Province of East Pakistan and another PLD 1900 Dacca 1025 ref.
(j) Civil service---
----Appeal---Maintainability---Order challenged in appeal was passed by Chief Minister of Province and was issued in the name of Governor of Province---No further departmental remedy being available to appellant, contention that appeal was not maintainable, as appellant had not exhausted remedy of filing departmental appeal was repelled.
Falak Sher Khan and another v. Secretary to Government to the Punjab etc. PLD 1989 SC 562 ref.
(k) Civil service---
----Promotion---Regular promotion, could only be made after obtaining recommendations of Departmental Promotion Committee.
Ch. Hakim Ali etc. v. Government of Punjab etc.1987 PLC (C.S.) 662 ref.
Muhammad Yasin Bhatti and Muhammad Ilyas Khan for Appellant.
Ch. Manzoor Hussain, D.A. for Respondent No.l.
Syed Jamshed Ali for Respondent No. 2.
Date of hearing: 3rd March, 1991.