DIRECTOR-GENERAL INTELLIGENCE BUREAU, ISLAMABAD versus AMIR MUJAHID KHAN
Section 8 Civil Servants (Appointments, Promotions and Exchanges) Rules, 1973, R8B Civil Servants (Sanitary) Rules, 1993, R3 Estacode Editions, 2000, SL No. 147 and 148 Seniority Department Promoting Direct Appointments On the basis of the charge, the development respondents temporarily faced a sanitary list / gradation list against which their departmental representations were dismissed but the service tribunal allowed their appeals. The respondents were subsequently promoted. Having obtained its original sanity for so long, the order of the Promotion Committee of the Department was continued in 18 18 2005, resulting in the respondents Progress was not made on a regular basis, therefore, it is believed that they are considered due to lack of required length of service and they have not been promoted, therefore, such respondents are honorably discharged. The exact date of their consideration cannot be given for court approval. Appeals were accepted to the extent of the respondents who were not permanently promoted on the basis but they were appointed on a temporary charge basis and were rejected on the basis of the respondents who were on a permanent basis Appointment At a meeting held on January 18, 2005, the department's appointment was promoted within a year. Subsequently, in the year 2006, for those who were promoted to development, the Supreme Court refused to decide the issue of seniority of development benches because it was not an issue before the court, the suicide proceedings of such an interfaith case. I could not decide. Accordingly
