Find a Lawyer

DR. MUSHTAQ AHMED QURESHI versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY KARACHI AND 4 OTHERS

Section 8 (4) and 24 Sindh Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973), Section 4 Sindh Civil Servants (Probation, Certification and Sanity) Rules, 1975, R13 Sindh Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Exchange) Rules, 1974, R 8A (2) The Superiority Appeal for the Service Tribunal Appellant guaranteed the notification issued by the authorities, whereby the respondents, despite being junior, (B520), seniority list, Appellant was shown serial number 4, while respondent Serial No. 5 was in appellant, under which circumstances the respondent was senior Appellant was posted as Assistant Professor, initially. Orthopedic Surgery was appointed to the teaching cadre in Edward Cadre on 4 4 1985 and was formalized on 15 9 1987, while the respondents were initially appointed on the basis of ad hoc on 5 2 1987 and were appointed on a regular basis. Was created as in 30 5 1989, in this capacity the appellant assistant professor was also senior to the respondent in both cadre. He was promoted as an Associate Professor (B19), in which, under the same information, in accordance with section 8 (4) of the section 8 (4) of the Sindh Civil Servants Act, 1973, he was appointed as a deputy. Maintain your senior seniority. At no stage did the respondents challenge that the legal and factual status of the appellant's sanity was determined on the basis of the first acting charge against the appellant, a junior, in the circumstances subordinate to R8A. Regular promotion shall not be considered in view of rule (2). Respondents of the Sindh Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Exchange) Rules, 1974, also sought regular promotion before the Appellant. attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Jehlum lawyer