MUHAMMAD MUSA vs PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT S — 2024 PLC(CS) 1536 GILGIT-BALTISTAN-SERVICE TRIBUNAL

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

MUHAMMAD MUSA VS PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT S. 10---Gilgit-Baltistan Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 2011, R. 4---Termination from service through verbal order---Scope and effect----Salary of the appellant (Naib Qasid at School) was verbally stopped and it was directed that he was no more in service---Case of the appellant was that he could not be removed verbally as he was appointed on the standard terms and condition under the service laws---Validity---Admittedly, the appellant was appointed after fulfilling the legal/codal formalities and thereafter he started to perform his duties at his place of posting and kept getting his pay---Nothing was available on record to question the performance of the appellant during the probation period of one year extendable for further one year under the rules---After successful completion of one year, the appellant was deemed to have been considered as permanent employee---Moreover, the appellant had served for more than 03 years as regular employee, which was over and above the extended period of probation---Hence, the service of appellant was termed as regular employee for all intents and purposes and his service could not be terminated without adopting legal procedure as provided under service law i.e. Gilgit-Baltistan Civil Servants Act, 2011 and Gilgit-Baltistan Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 2011---Record showed nothing adverse against the appellant or him having been proceeded under E&D Rules, 2011---Salary of the appellant was verbally stopped and it was directed that he was no more in service---Such practice was strange and against all the norms and practices as laid down and provided under the service laws---Hence, the respondents / department had not adopted any procedure for removal of service of appellant---Service Tribunal restored the appellant in service while treating the intervening period as leave without pay---Appeal was allowed accordingly.

MUHAMMAD MUSA vs PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT S — 2024 PLC(CS) 1536 GILGIT-BALTISTAN-SERVICE TRIBUNAL

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLC