Step 1 of 8
Welcome!
Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.
Step 1 of 7
Welcome!
Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.
Latest Judgments (All Jurisdictions within Pakistan)
ABDUR RAZZAQ VS THE STATE
Summary: Summary pending.
MST NAZIR BIBI VS THE STATE
Summary: Summary pending.
ABDUR RAZZAQ VS THE STATE RESPONDANT
Summary: Summary pending.
NEW ELECTRONICS PVT VS COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMSAPPRAISEMENT LTD KARACHI
Summary: Summary pending.
QUINN CORPORATION VS COTTON EXPORT CORPORATION
Summary: Summary pending.
DR BASHIR AHMED VS MANAGING DIRECTOR PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES CORPORATION HEAD OFFICE KARACHI AIRPORT
Summary: Service Law – Promotion – Procedural Irregularities:
(a) Selection Process – Bias and Malafide Intent:
The presence of the Acting Chief Medical Officer in the Promotion Board was challenged as she allegedly influenced the process to favor certain candidates and supersede those who opposed her appointment—It was held that PIAC regulations did not authorize the Acting Chief Medical Officer to participate in the Promotion Board’s deliberations—Allowing her to do so rendered the process tainted with bias and procedural impropriety, necessitating intervention by the Tribunal.
(b) Non-Compliance with Mandatory Promotion Procedures:
The Tribunal found that only 10 candidates were interviewed instead of the mandatory 15, in violation of Para 30.01.18 of the PIAC Personnel Policies Manual, which required that a panel of three candidates be prepared for each vacant post—Failure to adhere to this mandatory provision made the promotion process legally flawed and defective—The Tribunal reaffirmed that while promotion is not a vested right, administrative authorities must ensure procedural fairness and compliance with established regulations.
(c) Tribunal’s Jurisdiction – Substantial Defects in Promotion Process:
While Section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973, generally precludes judicial review of promotion decisions, the Tribunal held that intervention is justified where there is a substantial defect in the promotion process—As the Promotion Board was improperly constituted and violated mandatory procedural requirements, the Tribunal set aside the proceedings and directed PIAC to reconvene the Promotion Board in compliance with Administrative Order No. 4/2001 and the Personnel Policies Manual.
----Disposition: Proceedings of the Promotion Board set aside—Respondents directed to reconvene the Board and reconsider promotions strictly in accordance with PIAC regulations.
THE TAXATION OFFICER VS MS BECHAM PAKISTAN PVT LTD
Summary: Summary pending.
NAYY AR ABBAS S VS GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB
Summary: Summary pending.
PAKISTAN EXPATRIATE CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETYLTD THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER HI VS LAHORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THROUGH DIRECTOR GENERALLAHORE
Summary: Summary pending.
MUHAMMAD REHMAN VS RENT CONTROLLER ISLAMABAD
Summary: Summary pending.