Pakistan Case Law← Search
PLJ 2019 Islamabad 184

ASIF HAMEED vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Establishment

CitationPLJ 2019 Islamabad 184
CourtIslamabad High Court
Judge(s)Aamer Farooq
ResultPetition Allowed

The petitioner is a civil servant and is currently working in (BS-20). He is aggrieved of his deferment in promotion to (BS-20) in the recently held meeting of Central Selection Board (CSB).

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner , inter-alia, contended that no reasons have been advanced by the respondents as to why the petitioner has been deferred, however , in the reply it has been stated that it is due to pending inquiry against the petitioner; that it is a settled ' proposition that mere pendency of disciplinary proceedings is no bar to defer a person for promotion. It was submitted that the petitioner has been deferred with malafide inasmuch as inquiry is based on Whatsapp message circulated against the petitioner .

3. Learned Deputy Attorney General , inter-alia, contended that since there is pending inquiry against the petitioner , therefore, he was deferred,

4. Arguments advanced by learned counsels for the parties have been heard and documents placed on record examined with their able assistance.

5. The Central Selection Board (CSB) in its meeting held on 12.12.2018 deferred the petitioner . In this regards an inquiry has been initiated against the petitioner on 15.1.2019. There is nothing on record to indicate that the petitioner was deferred due to pending inquiry , however in Para-4 of the preliminary objections of the parawise comments it is mentioned that the petitioner was recommended for deferment due to pendency of disciplinary proceedings. It is trite law that mere pendency of disciplinary proceedings is no bar for a person to be considered or recommended for promotion. Reliance is placed on case titled as "Shafqut-ur-Rehman Ranjha Vs Federat ion of Pakistan and others" (W.P No. 3234 of 2017)

In light of above position of law and fact, the decision to defer the petitioner is not tenable.

6. For the above reasons, the decision by the respondents to defer the petitioner is set-aside with direction that he shall be considered for promotion afres h in the forthcoming meeting of the Central Selection Board (CSB) notwithstanding the pendency of disciplinary proceedings.

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