MISS ZUBAIDA KHATOON versus MRS. TEHMINA SAJID SHEIKH
High Court Appellate Promotion Notification of High Court Appellate Promotion Notification was set aside by the High Court and the authorities were instructed to take up the issue internationally. The promotion of the respondent to the promotion committee should be promoted. The seniority of the parties was not considering the question of respondents' development or eligibility to hold a post, but after examining its fitness and competitiveness with respect to service records, the applicant would be recommended for promotion and Respondents were promoted in terms of recommendations for becoming senior. The Committee, the notification was issued which was rejected by the High Court against this development notification, the respondents had the right to appeal in view of the specific bar contained in section `B 'under section 4 (1) of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973. was not. The High Court was not in violation of the mandate read with Article 2 of Article 199 of the Constitution, since the respondent did not challenge the notification before the service tribunal in view of the specific bar in section 4 (1) of the Respondent Service Tribunals Act, 1973. And the defendant's main complaint was that he had no service record. It was considered during the decision on the question related to the fitness which was submitted to the High Court after the notification was canceled, the court could not instruct the respondent to proceed and instead issue the matter through a publicity committee. The decision should have been left out because he was entitled to authority. After the de novo practice, pass the appropriate order. The Supreme Court upheld the cancellation of the appellant's advertisement notification
