CHAIRMAN, P.O.F., WAH CANTT. vs MUZHAR SHAH
The Chairman, P.O.F., Wah Cantt. filed a petition questioning the validity of the judgment passed by the Service Tribunal, Islamabad, whereby move-over was granted to the respondent from B-16 to B-17 by treating an average report as a good report. The core legal question revolves around the interpretation and scope of the Notification dated 17-2-1991 regarding the eligibility criteria for move-over for civil servants based on their annual confidential reports. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine the scope of the said notification, while declining to suspend the operation of the Service Tribunal's order, and directed that the appeal be fixed for an early hearing. The Court held that leave to appeal is warranted to interpret the specific notification governing move-over rights.
- Whether an average annual confidential report can be treated as a good report for the purpose of move-over for a civil servant?
- What is the correct scope of the Notification dated 17-2-1991 regarding move-over from B-16 to B-17?
- Can an average report be treated as adverse if it has not been specifically communicated to the civil servant?
ORDER
1. The Chairman, P.O.F. Has called in question the validity- of judgment dated 27-1-1996 as modified by order dated 21-7-1996, passed by the Service Tribunal, Islamabad in Appeal No. 168(R) of 1996, whereby move-over has been granted to respondent by treating the average report as good report. In, terms of Notification dated 17-2-1991 a civil servant is eligible for move-over from B-16 to- B-17 if he gets one good report within last five years inclusion of the year of move-over, Federal Service Tribunal has relied on the decision of this Court reported in PLD 1992 SC 144 wherein it was observed: "If there is no adverse report against him and he gets 'average report' would have to be treated as 'generally good' for purpose of move-over. Because a report 'average cannot be treated as adverse' unless specifically so treated and then conveyed to the civil servant as an adverse report.
2. "
3. Reliance was also placed on a decision of this Court reported in 1994 SCM R 544.
4. Leave to appeal is granted to consider the scope of the Notification No. F.7(1)Impt.1/90-Vo1.II, dated 17-2-1991. We are not inclined to suspend the operation of the order of the Service Tribunal.
5. However, that appeal should be heard if an early date. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.