Citation Name: 2024 PLC(CS) 1362 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case ABDUL GHAFOOR KAKAR vs Honorable BALOCHISTAN HIGH COURT S — 2024 PLC(CS) 1362 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Citation: 2024 PLC(CS) 1362 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN
Court: Balochistan High Court
Year: 2024
Reporter: PLC
Parties: Citation Name: 2024 PLC(CS) 1362 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case ABDUL GHAFOOR KAKAR vs Honorable BALOCHISTAN HIGH COURT S
Subject matter: Service
Provisions referred to: S. 5---J

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

Citation Name: 2024 PLC(CS) 1362 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case ABDUL GHAFOOR KAKAR VS Honorable BALOCHISTAN HIGH COURT S.5---Judicial Officer relieved from Judicial Service of one province placed at disposal of Judicial Service of Islamabad Capital Territory---Ante-dated promotions, entitlement to---Scope---Judicial officer who earlier served in Balochistan Subordinate Judiciary, was presently posted at Islamabad under Islamabad High Court ---Judicial officer (Additional District and Sessions Judge) was denied ante-dated promotion, when he was judicial officer on the payroll of Balochistan High Court (BHC) on the plea that he was entitled to the such ante-dated promotions in the light of the judgment of the Balochistan High Court / Balochistan Subordinate Judiciary Services Tribunal (SJT) dated 25th April 2016 reported as PLD 2016 Bal. 56 ('judgment-in-question')---Appellant had sought promotion from the date when the other Judicial Officers of BHC were given promotion, as he claimed that he was the permanent employee of BHC---Validity---Stance of the appellant did not carry any weight, on the ground that at the time of passing of the judgment-in-question, he was no more part of the Balochistan Subordinate Judiciary, rather his services being a Judicial Officer at Islamabad were under the IHC and run by the Islamabad High Court Rules, 2011---This appointment was made after his appearance before the Judicial Selection Board and thereafter being relieved by the BHC, thus, he had relinquished all his right, if any, and could not press his right for promotion before the Balochistan High Court either with back date or on a strength of implementation of the judgment-in-question retrospectively in his favour---Appellant had failed to make out a case in his favour---Appeal, filed by judicial officer, being merit-less, was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLC

2024 PLC(CS) 1561 GILGIT-BALTISTAN-SERVICE TRIBUNALENGINEER Dr. NAZIR HUSSAIN VS PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT S.5(1)---appeal before the Service Tribunal---Project Director of a hospital---Locus sta…
2024 PLC(CS) 1561 GILGIT-BALTISTAN-SERVICE TRIBUNALENGINEER Dr. NAZIR HUSSAIN VS PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT S.5(1)---additional charge of a post---Civil servant---Scope ---assailing order before t…
2024 PLC(CS) 1561 GILGIT-BALTISTAN-SERVICE TRIBUNALENGINEER Dr. NAZIR HUSSAIN VS PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT S. 5(1)---additional charge, withdrawal of---authority, powers of---Challenging of withd…
2024 PLC(CS) 1085 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRMASOODA IQBAL, ELEMENTARY TEACHER, GOVERNMENT GIRLS MIDDLE SCHOOL AAHI, DISTRICT BHIMBER VS SECRETARY ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION Ord…
2024 PLC 338 SUPREME-COURTWAQAR AHMED VS The FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Cabinet Secretariat, Establishment Division, Islamabad art. 199---Employees engaged throug…
2024 PLC 314 SUPREME-COURTTOWN ADMINISTRATION VS MOHAMMAD KHALID Sched., S.Os. 1(b), 1(e) & 12---Employees employed for a continuous period exceeding nine months---Di…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English