Syed SHAUKAT ALI ZAIDI vs PRESIDENT OF PAKISTAN and others
The petitioner challenged the order of the Federal Service Tribunal which dismissed his service appeal against adverse remarks recorded in his Annual Confidential Report for the year 1995-96 by the Chairman of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, while partially allowing the appeal to expunge an observation regarding his physical disability of vision. Upon hearing the petitioner's counsel, the Supreme Court of Pakistan granted leave to appeal to consider questions regarding the competency of a reporting officer working in the same pay scale and grade to record ACRs, the legal efficacy of ACRs recorded beyond the prescribed time limits, and whether the impugned judgment deviated from the law laid down in Government of Punjab v. Ehsanul Haq Sethi.
- Whether the Reporting Officer is not competent to record ACR of an officer working in the same Pay Scale and Grade?
- Whether the ACRs recorded far beyond the time prescribed by the Government for recording ACRs have lost their efficacy?
- Whether the impugned judgment suffers from deviation of law laid down by this Court in Government of Punjab v. Ehsanul Haq Sethi?
ORDER
' Petitioner is aggrieved by the Order dated 1-1-2001 of the Federal Tribunal whereby his Service Appeal impugning the vires of adverse remarks for the year 1995-96 recorded by the then Chairman Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was dismissed. The learned Service Tribunal while dismissing the petitioner's appeal has allowed the. Appeal to the extent of expunging the observation in pen picture in the ACRs of the petitioner with respect to his physical disability of vision.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and examining the impugned judgment leave to appeal is granted inter alia to consider and examine the following questions of law:--
(i) Whether the Reporting Officer is not competent to record ACR of an officer working in the same Pay Scale and Grade?
(ii) Whether the ACRs recorded far beyond the time prescribed by the Government for recording ACRs have lost their efficacy? And
(iii) Whether the impugned judgment suffers from deviation of law laid down by this Court in Government of Punjab v. Ehsanul Haq Sethi (PLD 1986 SC 684).