Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 139 of 1979, decided on 11th December, 1981.
(On petition against the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal Lahore dated 9‑10‑1978 passed in Appeal No, 144/794 of 1976).
C
‑‑‑ Art. 212(3) and M. L. R. 118 of 1972‑Pay scale‑Record showing petitioner employed as Steno‑typist but treated as Junior Clerk and given N. P. S. 6 as against his claim to be Head Clerk‑Counsel for Government not in a position to controvert such facts‑Petition converted into appeal and appeal accepted with direction that petitioner shall be given N. P. S. 8 applicable to Steno‑typists.‑[Civil services].
Malik A. R. Arshad, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Abid Nawaz, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Asadullah Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Ijaz Ali, Advocate‑on -Record for Respondent.
Date of hearing : l1th February, 1981.
.‑The petitioner was an employee in the APWA College for Women which is a degree college at Lahore. This college was nationalized along with all other educational institutions under M. L. R. 118, w. e. f. 1st of September, 1972. Vide Notification dated 12‑4‑1975 National Pay Scales were made applicable to the ministerial staff of the nationalized institutions and hence petitioner came to be governed by them.
2. The petitioner was treated as a Junior Clerk as against his claim to be Head Clerk and was therefore given National Pay Scale No. 6. The matter ultimately went up to the Tribunal which found that the petitioner's claim that he was serving as a Head Clerk was not correct because the list of the staff which had been made over to the Department did not show him as one. It was, however, not denied that according to the documents supplied by the Principal, AP WA College, the appellant was employed as a Steno‑typist and the acquittance rolls also indicate that he was drawing salary as a steno‑typist. Whether he was an Assistant/Head Clerk or not I is not denied that he was a steno‑typist. He should, therefore, have been given N. P. S. 8 which is applicable to stenotypists.
3. We, therefore, issued Notice to the Government and heard the counsel on its behalf. He is not in a position to controvert the fact that the petitioner is a steno‑typist. We, therefore, convert this petition into an appeal, accept it and direct that the petitioner shall be given Pay Scale No. 8 which is applicable to steno‑typists. The parties shall be left to bear their own costs.
Order accordingly.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer