AZIZ-UR-REHMAN AKBAR versus SECRETARY, HEALTH DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB, LAHORE
Section 3 Intra Court Appeals Civil Service Service Termination of Service Lakos Poinetti, Principle Applied Appellant who is eligible for test and interview in response to an advertisement for the position of Progressive Officer (BPS 17), but instead The appointment was set against this post. Because, on the basis of the contract, they were offered the post of Additional Admin Officer (BS16) lower party, which was accepted by the appellant and subsequently appointed when the government served the contract employees. A policy was introduced to regulate, including the name of the appellant. Others were forwarded for regularization, but the authority declined to recommend their names regularly, only on the basis that there were no rules for appellant's occupation of appellant services. , The appellant performed his services effectively. There has been a defect on his record for almost 12 years and the department has regularly recommended his name. If any irregularities were found after appellant's appointment then he would not be harmed in any way. It should be raised even if the appellant was appointed against a vacancy which was not in his presence, but the error could not be attributed to him. Anyone, the beneficiary of an illegal appointment department or a competent authority, could not be held alone because primarily the authority, who actually wrongfully exercised its authority, was held liable when Once someone was appointed to make an appointment,
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
