Pakistan Case Law
1997 PLC (C. S.) 8

NOOR ELAHI vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN And Others

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1997 PLC (C. S.) 8
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Constitutional Petition No. 235 of 1995
Date1995-12-11
Judge(s)Sajjad Ali Shah, C.J., and Muhammad Bashir Khan Jehangiri
ResultLeave granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter arises from a petition filed by Noor Elahi, a Head Clerk in the Pakistan Air Force at Sargodha, seeking the expungement of an adverse Annual Confidential Report (A.C.R.) for the year 1991. The core legal question concerns whether an adverse A.C.R. communicated with a significant delay of nearly four years and allegedly issued in violation of departmental instructions is liable to be expunged. The Supreme Court of Pakistan granted leave to appeal to consider the contentions raised regarding the delayed communication and the alleged malice or procedural impropriety of the reporting officer. The court held that the petition raised arguable questions regarding the violation of paragraphs 15, 16-C, and 19 of Confidential Reports, PAF Civilians, laying down the principle that unexplained and inordinate delays in communicating adverse reports along with procedural breaches warrant a detailed examination by the court.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether an adverse A.C.R. communicated after an inordinate delay is liable to be expunged?
  • Does the communication of an adverse report in violation of departmental instructions vitiate the report?
annual confidential reportexpungement of acrdelay in communicationpaf civiliansservice tribunal

ORDER

1. It is submitted by the petitioner that he is Head Clerk in P.A.F., Sargodha, and has served for thirty- one years but has earned only one adverse Annual Confidential Report in 1991 which was given to him by Reporting Officer, Flight Lieutenant Asim Malik, under whom he served only for one year and who had grievance against him. It is further .Submitted that this adverse A.C.R. Of 1991 was communicated to him after a delay of nearly four years on 15-8-1994 which was done in violation of paragraphs 15, 16-C and 19 of Confidential Reports, PAF Civilians. It is contended that in the circumstances the said A.C.R. Is liable to be expunged. Leave is granted to consider the contention stated above.

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