NAZAR MUHAMMAD vs THE STATE and others
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by the petitioner against the dismissal of his service appeal by the Service Tribunal. The petitioner, a former private school teacher inducted into government service following the nationalization of educational institutions, claimed entitlement to an advance increment based on his Master's degree and prior pay scale, which benefit was initially granted and subsequently withdrawn. The core legal question is whether the Service Tribunal erred in dismissing the petitioner's appeal without considering the facts of the case. The Supreme Court held that the Service Tribunal failed to consider the facts at all, finding substance in the petitioner's contention. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal, directed that the appeal be made ready for hearing on the present record, and ordered that no recovery of the previously paid amount be made during the pendency of the appeal. The key principle laid down is that appellate tribunals must adequately consider the facts of a case when adjudicating service matters.
- Whether the Service Tribunal is required to consider the facts of a case while dismissing a service appeal?
- Can recovery of an amount already paid on account of an advance increment be made during the pendency of an appeal?
ORDER
' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.-- The petitioner was serving in a private school when the educational institutions were nationalised. The petitioner claims that he had a Master's degree and was drawing pay of Rs,400 when he was inducted into the government service consequent upon the nationalisation. In accordance with the relevant rules he was entitled to one advance increment in the scale in which his pay was fixed. The grievance of the petitioner is that this benefit was initially granted to him but was later illegally withdrawn. He filed an appeal before the Service Tribunal but it was dismissed. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. In support of this petition it is contended that while dismissing his appeal the learned Tribunal has not considered the facts of his case at all. On going g through the judgment of the learned Tribunal we find substance in the contention of the petitioner. Leave to appeal is granted. Security for costs in the sum of Rs,1,000. The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with permission to the parties to file additional documents, if any. During the C pendency of the appeal, no recovery on account of the amount already paid to him, be made.