| Case ID |
00fb8e58-858f-477e-bf03-c084957c3081 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Appeal No. 131(L) of 1984 |
| Decision Date |
Jan 30, 1989 |
| Hearing Date |
Jan 25, 1989 |
| Decision |
The appeal was dismissed due to the appellant's failure to exhaust departmental remedies as required by the Service Tribunals Act. The appellant's claims regarding adverse remarks in his Annual Confidential Report were not substantiated, and the court found that the appellant did not serve under the Reporting Officer for the requisite period. Consequently, the appeal was deemed incompetent and was dismissed without any order as to costs. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around an appeal against adverse remarks recorded in the Annual Confidential Report of the appellant, who served as an Income-tax Officer. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of exhausting departmental remedies before approaching the tribunal, as mandated by the Service Tribunals Act. The appellant contended that he had submitted a representation but failed to provide adequate proof of its submission. The court scrutinized the evidence presented and concluded that the appeal was not filed in accordance with procedural requirements, ultimately leading to its dismissal. This case underscores the critical nature of following proper channels in administrative grievances and the implications of failing to do so. |
| Court |
Federal Service Tribunal
|
| Entities Involved |
|
| Judges |
CH. HASAN NAWAZ,
KH. ABDUL JALIL,
Sardar ALI MASOOD RAZA QAZILBASH
|
| Lawyers |
Hafiz Tariq Naseem
|
| Petitioners |
|
| Respondents |
others,
INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF (S&C), HYDERABAD
|
| Citations |
1989 SLD 2216,
1989 PLC 473
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Service Tribunals Act
|
| Sections |
4
|