Pakistan Case Law
1995 SCMR 881

ZAFAR IQBAL vs M.G.O., M.G.O. BRANCH, GHQ RAWALPINDI and 3 others

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1995 SCMR 881
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No, 328 of 1994
Date1994-12-19
Judge(s)Saiduzzaman Siddiqui and Mukhtar Ahmad Junejo
Authored bySaiduzzaman Siddiqui
ResultLeave refused
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This petition for leave to appeal was filed before the Supreme Court of Pakistan against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, which had dismissed the petitioner's service appeal on jurisdictional grounds. The petitioner, despite being senior to the private respondents, was denied promotion by the departmental authority based on unfavorable entries in his Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs). After exhausting departmental remedies, the petitioner sought a direction from the Service Tribunal for his promotion on the basis of seniority. The Service Tribunal dismissed the appeal, holding that it lacked jurisdiction to determine the fitness of a civil servant for promotion. The Supreme Court of Pakistan upheld this decision, ruling that the question of fitness for promotion is expressly barred from the jurisdiction of the Service Tribunal under the relevant statutory provisions. Consequently, the Supreme Court refused leave to appeal and dismissed the petition.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does the Service Tribunal have jurisdiction to determine the fitness of a civil servant to hold a particular post or be promoted?
  • Can a civil servant challenge a denial of promotion based on ACR entries before the Service Tribunal under Section 4(1) of the Service Tribunals Act 1973?
  • Whether the statutory bar on promotion-related questions under the Service Tribunals Act 1973 applies when a senior civil servant is bypassed for promotion by a departmental promotion committee?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 4(1), Service Tribunals Act 1973
leave to appealpromotionseniorityjurisdictionfitness for promotionAnnual Confidential Reportscivil service

' SAIDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, J.---The petitioner is seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal dated 4-5-1994 whereby the service appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed on the ground that the Service Tribunal had no jurisdiction in the matter.

2. The relevant facts of the case are that the petitioner though senior to the private respondents in the petition was denied promotion by the Departmental Authority. After exhausting the departmental remedies the petitioner approached the Service Tribunal with the following prayer:- "It is therefore prayed that this Honourable Court may be please to accept the appeal and direct the respondent No, 1 to promote the appellant on the basis of seniority."

The learned Service Tribunal dismissed the appeal by the petitioner holding that in view of the bar contained in section 4(1) of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973 the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to go into the question of fitness or otherwise of a civil servant to hold a particular post. It is quite clear from reading of order of the Service Tribunal that the petitioner was denied promotion by the Departmental Promotion Committee on the ground that he was not found fit for promotion on account of certain entries in his ACRs, The question of promotion being excepted from the jurisdiction of the Tribunal under section 4(1) of the Service Tribunal the learned Service Tribunal rightly declined to go into the question raised before it. The petition is accordingly dismissed and leave is refused.

Cited by 14 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.