ANSAR MEHMOOD vs DIRECTOR GENERAL PUNJAB AGRICULTURE MARKETING REGULATORY AUTHORITY Ss — 2025 PLC(CS) 1643 SERVICE-TRIBUNAL-PUNJAB

Case information

Citation: 2025 PLC(CS) 1643 SERVICE-TRIBUNAL-PUNJAB
Year: 2025
Reporter: PLC
Parties: ANSAR MEHMOOD vs DIRECTOR GENERAL PUNJAB AGRICULTURE MARKETING REGULATORY AUTHORITY Ss
Subject matter: Criminal
Provisions referred to: S. 2; S. 4; S. 19; Accountability Act (XII of 2006); Accountability Act ('the PEEDA Act, 2006'); PEEDA Act; Punjab Service Tribunal Act

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

ANSAR MEHMOOD VS DIRECTOR GENERAL PUNJAB AGRICULTURE MARKETING REGULATORY AUTHORITY Ss. 2(b) & 4---Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act (XII of 2006), Ss.2h)(i) & 19---Employee of Market Committee---Disciplinary matter---Punjab Service Tribunal---Jurisdiction---Scope---Admittedly, appellant was an employee of the Market Committee and disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him under Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act ('the PEEDA Act, 2006') and the appeal was filed in this Tribunal deeming appellant to be a civil servant---Section 19 of the PEEDA Act, 2006 after incorporation of 2(h)(i) clearly draws a line between the civil servant and employees defined under S. 2(h)(i) of the PEEDA Act, 2006, whereunder such employees if aggrieved by any final order whether original or appellate have been excluded from the definition of a civil servant---In terms of S. 2(b) of the Punjab Service Tribunal Act, 1974 appellant was neither in the civil service of the Province nor he was holding a civil post in connection with the affair of the Province ---According to S. 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunal Act, 1974, only a civil servant who does not fall under the ambit of S. 19 read with S.2(h)(i)of the PEEDA Act, 2006 can file appeal before the Service Tribunal ---Appeal, being not maintainable, was dismissed.

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLC

2025 PLC(CS) 1593 SUPREME-COURTPROVINCE OF SINDH VS AMANULLAH 'Mutatis mutandis'---Connotation---Expression mutatis mutandis generally applies for making certain adjustmen…
2025 PLC(CS) 1663 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSHEHROZE RAHEEM MUGHAL VS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION R. 11---Identical cases, entertaining of---Scope ---Petitioner, while relying on R. 11 o…
2025 PLC(CS) 606 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRGHAZANFAR ALI VS VICE-CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR Principle---adequate alternate remedy----Under common law, remedy of…
2025 PLC(CS) 1663 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSHEHROZE RAHEEM MUGHAL VS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Conduct of the party invoking writ jurisdiction of High Court---Scope and effect ---Peti…
2025 PLC(CS) 1663 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSHEHROZE RAHEEM MUGHAL VS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION administration of justice---Points ascertained at time of admission of case---Subsequent…
2025 PLC(CS) 1663 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSHEHROZE RAHEEM MUGHAL VS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Doctrine of laches---Indolence of aggrieved party---Effect---Petitioner filed the writ p…

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