Find a Lawyer

MRS. SAMIA IQBAL versus GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB THROUGH HOME SECRETARY, PUNJAB, LAHORE

Upgrades of Post Petitioners Appointed in Arts 199 and 212 Constitutional Jurisdiction Civil Service BPS16 claimed that they were entitled to an upgrade because other government employees with the same qualifications were included in BPS 17. Therefore, their involvement in BPS 16 is without cause discrimination before the petitioners referred the same relief to the High Court to resolve the matter by making the Chief Secretary a High Power Committee. The Syed committee did not recommend an increase in the scale but allowed special allowances to the applicants. ? There was a matter of upgrading policy for the post of one month basic salary and constitutional jurisdiction could not be interfered with by the High Court. Upgradation cannot be claimed by higher employees as the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court. Was stopped in the matter. Under Article 212 of the Terms and Conditions of Service, applicants may refer to the Service Tribunal, which had all the necessary options for redressal of their grievance, in which the constitutional petition was dismissed. \ R \ n

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010

• Mst. BUDHAN BIBI v. KHUSHI MUHAMMAD 2010 YLR 1436
• MUHAMMAD RAMZAN v. RABIA BIBI 2010 CLC 1438
• Sheikh MUHAMMAD NAFEES v. ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, HAFIZABAD 2010 PCrLJ 1442
• TAJVEED IQBAL v. RETURNING OFFICER NA-178, Muzaffargarh-III 2010 CLC 1444
• ARIF HUSSAIN BUKHARI v. RANA MUNIR AHMAD 2010 MLD 1445
• GHULAM NABI v. State 2010 YLR 1445
• MUHAMMAD MANSHA v. State 2010 MLD 1446
• TAYYAB AHMAD alias Makki v. State 2010 PCrLJ 1450

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2010 →

top advocate from Rangoo lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes