PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary Gilgit-Baltistan Versus Dr. GHULAM ALI

1. DR. RANA MUHAMMAD SHAMIM, C.J.--- The learned Advocate General contends that the respondents filed a service Appeal No. 265/2014 before the learned Gilgit-Baltistan Service Tribunal, whereby the said service appeal was accepted vide impugned judgment dated 02-12-2014 in Appeal No. 265/2014 while declaring the respondents (Officers of Administrative Cadre Health Department Gilgit-Baltistan) entitled to receive incentive package/health professional allowance with effect from 29.03.2012 to 01.01.2014. The petitioners being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with filed this petition for leave to appeal. Notices were issued to the respondents and the case was fixed for hearing today. He contends that the incentive package was given to the senior Medical Consultants/Specialists and the petitioners are the administrative staff of Health Department Gilgit-Baltistan, hence, they are not entitled for the said package. He also submits that the learned Service Tribunal did not apply its judicial mind while passing the impugned judgment, therefore, the same is not sustainable and liable to be set aside.

2. We have heard the learned Advocate General at length, perused the record of the case file and gone through the impugned judgment dated 02.12.2014 in appeal No. 265/2014 passed by the learned Service Tribunal. The learned Advocate General could not point out any infirmity and illegality in the said impugned Judgment. We, therefore, are not inclined to grant leave to appeal. The leave is refused. Consequently, the impugned judgment dated 02.12.2014 in Appeal No.265/2014 passed by the learned Service Tribunal being well reasoned is maintained.

3. The leave is refused.

4. HBT/69/GB Leave refused.