Pakistan Case Law
1999 SCMR 1587

CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, LAHORE and 2 others vs MUHAMMAD SAEED ZAFAR and another

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1999 SCMR 1587
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Date1998-07-06
Judge(s)Irshad Hasan Khan and Ch. Muhammad Arif
Authored byIrshad Hasan Khan
ResultPetition dismissed
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 by the Government of Punjab against a judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, which had ordered the expunction of adverse remarks recorded in the Annual Confidential Report (ACR) of the respondent, Muhammad Saeed Zafar. The core legal question concerned whether the delay in communicating adverse remarks to a civil servant renders them invalid. The respondent had received the adverse remarks approximately four and a half months after they were recorded by the countersigning officer. The Supreme Court observed that adverse remarks must be communicated within a reasonable period. Because the departmental authorities failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the delay in communication, the Tribunal's decision to expunge the remarks was upheld. The Court affirmed that unreasonable delay in the communication of adverse remarks invalidates them. Furthermore, the Court held that the matter involved an individual grievance rather than a question of law of public importance, thus precluding interference under Article 212(3) of the Constitution. Consequently, the petition was dismissed and leave to appeal was refused.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does an unreasonable delay in communicating adverse remarks in an Annual Confidential Report justify their expunction?
  • Is a dispute regarding the expunction of adverse remarks in an individual's ACR considered a question of law of public importance under Article 212(3) of the Constitution?
  • Are departmental authorities required to explain the delay in communicating adverse remarks to a civil servant?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Article 212(3) of the Constitution
Annual Confidential Reportadverse remarksservice lawdelay in communicationcivil servantexpunction of remarksFederal Service Tribunal

' IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, J.---This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment dated 1-10-1997 passed by the Federal Service Tribunal, Lahore (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), in Appeal No,327-L of 1997.

2. The dispute herein relates to expunction of adverse remarks recorded in the Annual Confidential Report of respondent Muhammad Saeed Zafar, for the period from 1-1-1995 to 9-9-1995. It is an admitted fact that the countersigning officer recorded his remarks on 3-10-1996 and the same were communicated to the respondent on 16-2-1997 i.e, after a lapse of about 4-1/2 months. The representation filed by the respondent was not disposed of by the SGA&I Department.

Consequently, the respondent approached the Tribunal at the expiry' of the stipulated period of 90 days.

3. It is well-settled that adverse remarks should be confinunicated within reasonable period. Here there was unreasonable delay in communicating the adverse remarks to the respondent. The departmental authorities failed to explain each day's delay before the Tribunal. There being no reasonable explanation for not communicating the adverse remarks within the prescribed period, the Tribunal was right in not upholding such remarks and expunged the same. The same view was taken by this Court in the case of Ch. Saeed Ahmed v. Federation of Pakistan and others (1996 SCM R 256). In any event, the dispute herein relates to an individual grievance and no question of law of public importance is involved warranting interference under Article 212(3) of the Constitution.

4. Resultantly, the petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Leave is refused.

Cited by 13 cases

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