TANVIR REHMAT MALIK versus REGISTRAR, LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE
Appellant's Compatibility for the Scope of the Eligibility Scope of the Candidate for Development under the Rule 8 of the R8 High Court Establishment (Appointment and Terms of Service) Scope of Assistant Registrar (BS18) Was denied promotion. Being senior to other candidates, because they had lower educational qualifications than other candidates, Rule 8 of the High Court Establishment (Rules of Appointment and Terms of Service) Rules indicated that the standard of development was seniority. Low fitness was, therefore, not an educational qualification One of the factors to consider for the qualification of strength is that otherwise, academic ability is defined as competence and not under the parameters of fitness. The competent authority did not argue that the appellant was not eligible or did not have the requisite seniority or was ineligible for promotion for any reason. The High Court, promoted by the appellate court, was promoted to the position of Assistant Registrar. , But was exempt from returning without any benefit because he voluntarily waived them, according to the observation that an appeal was allowed under it if the competent authority had a standard of promotion of educational qualification. If it is deemed necessary to include, the High Court Establishment 8 (Appointment and Terms of Service) rules should be amended appropriately Can go
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
