Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
1990 SCMR 1516

SENIOR MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE, N.W.F.P. PESHAWAR and others vs

Citation1990 SCMR 1516
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No,126-P of 1989
Date1990-01-09
Judge(s)Nasim Hasan Shah, Syed Usman Ali Shah
ResultPetition dismissed

ORDER

1. ' S.USMAN ALI SHAH, J.---This petition for leave to appeal filed by the petitioners is directed against the judgment of the N.-W.F.P. Service Tribunal dated 12-3-1989, whereby Appeal No,186 of 1988 of respondent No,1 was accepted.

2. ' Muhammad Iqbal Khan respondent No,1 was an Assistant Excise and Taxation Officer, Peshawar in the year 1986, under the administrative control of the petitioner No,1 . He was posted from Peshawar to D.I.Khan on the same post where he was communicated adverse remarks given to him in his A.C.R. For the year 1986, vide letter No,19053/Estab: ACR dated 17-9-1987 (Annexure 'A'). The respondent made a representation against these remarks to petitioner No,1 being the appellate authority. The said representation was rejected by the petitioner No,1 vide letter No,16091/Estab: PF- 54, dated 19-10-1988. Being aggrieved the respondent No,1 filed appeal before the N.-W.F.P. Service Tribunal, Peshawar (respondent No,2). The learned Chairman and Member of the Tribunal after examining the case:of the respondent No,1, accepted the appeal and expunged the adverse remarks from his A.C.R. For the year 1986, vide impugned judgment. Hence, this petition for leave to appeal.

3. ' The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that though the remarks of the reporting officer give a good entry of the ACR but the opinion of the counter-signing authority making adverse entry on the basis of material before him, was wrongly interfered with by the learned Service Tribunal. We have gone through the judgment of the learned Tribunal in the light of the contention raised by the learned counsel. We find nothing exceptional in the impugned finding and the Tribunal has the jurisdiction to hear the appeal in the matter. As we find no question of public importance involved in this petition. Hence, it is, accordingly dismissed.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch