Find a Lawyer

SAADAT ULLAH KHAN versus SIKANDAR HAYAT SHAHEEN

Civil Servants Act 1973 Section 23 Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), Section 4 (1), Proviso (a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 212 (3) Seniority Petitioners Government employees were given seniority on the respondents President Pakistan. The legality of the order was challenged by the Service Tribunal under Section 23, Civil Servants Act, 1973, which stated that the applicants could not be legally placed against the defendants in the seniority list. Is. The contention was that despite the Service Tribunal recognizing that the applicants' case falls within the purview of Section 23, the Civil Servants Act, 1973, the Service Rules stated that the applicants could not be granted seniority according to the Service Rules. ? Their case fell properly under the purview of power under section 23, the Civil Servants Act, 1973. There was no question of applying the general rules. Otherwise the whole purpose and intention under section 23 will be abolished, the applicants emphasized the strong effect of Section 23, Civil Servants Act, 1973, in the case of rigorous general rules and regulations, the next dispute was: The service tribunal was unable to examine it. What authority could be exercised under Section 23, Civil Servants Act, under the President Pakistan Convention, was also raised before the Service Tribunal under S: 4 (1), Provois (A), Service Tribunals Act, 1973? Was banned. No representation was filed against the Behavior Sanitary List. Applicants raised questions for the law, which could affect a number of issues, including the interpretation of section 23, the Civil Servants Act 1973, and the arguments touching the jurisdiction. best advocate from Landi Kotal lawyer