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 Petitions Nos. 86 and 97 of 1984, decided on 11th June, 1985.
(From the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, dated 30‑11‑1983, passed in case Appeal No. 29/44 of _1983).
‑‑‑Art. 212‑‑Civil Service Tribunal holding civil servant to be entitled not only to minimum of N.P.S. 17 but also to annual increments in that scale from day such civil servant was posted/adjusted in his own pay and a grade viz. N.P.S. 16‑‑Regularisation of promotion with effect from such date not granted by Tribunal‑‑Leave to appeal against order of Tribunal granted to both civil servant and Government as question of public importance was involved.
Petitioner in person (in Civil Petition No. 86).
Nemo for Respondents (in Civil Petition No. 86).
Nusratullah, Senior Advocate Supreme Court with Ejaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record (in Civil Petition No. 97).
Respondent in person (in Civil Petition No. 97).
Date of hearing: 11th June, 1985.
‑‑Sh. Amar Maftoon, a teacher in N.P.S. 16 in the Education Department of the Province of the Punjab, was posted/adjusted on his "own pay and grade", as Subject Specialist, Government College for Elementary Teachers Training, Sargodha, a post in N.P.S. 17, which he jointed on 13‑5‑1981. His promotion was later regularised with effect from 20‑9‑1983. He claimed that the regularization of his promotion should be effective from 13‑5‑1981 and that he should be paid the salary and allowances in N.P.S. 17 accordingly. The Punjab Service Tribunal, before whom he came in appeal, held him entitled not only to the minimum of N.P.S. 17 but also to the annual increments in that scale with effect from 13‑5‑1981. As the relief of regularisation of promotion with effect from 13‑5‑1981 was not granted by the Tribunal, he has filed Civil Petition No. 86 of 1984 for leave to appeal.
2. The Province, too, feeling aggrieved by the order allowing annual increments in N. P. S. 17 has sought leave to appeal by the other petition.
3. The petitions raise questions of law of public importance. Leave to appeal is, therefore, granted in both of them.
M.B.A. Leave granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer