Haji NOOR AHMAD vs GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB and another
This petition arises out of a judgment passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal dismissing the petitioner's appeal regarding promotion from BS-17 to BS-18 on the ground that the petitioner possessed an M.A. degree in the 3rd Division, whereas a 2nd Division was purportedly required. The core legal question was whether the requirement of possessing at least a 2nd Division M.A. degree applied to candidates seeking promotion under the 67% promotion quota or solely to those applying through initial recruitment under the 33% quota pursuant to the Punjab Education Department (Schools Education) Recruitment Rules, 1987. The Supreme Court held that the contentions raised regarding the interpretation of the Schedule to the Rules required consideration. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal and directed the matter to be fixed along with a related petition.
- Whether possession of a second division M.A. degree is a mandatory prerequisite for promotion from BS-17 to BS-18 under the Punjab Education Department (Schools Education) Recruitment Rules, 1987?
- Does the qualification requirement of a second division apply equally to initial recruitment and promotion quotas under the relevant service rules?
- Punjab Education Department (Schools Education) Recruitment Rules 1987
ORDER
' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.--- This petition arises out of the judgment dated 2nd April, 2003 passed by Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore whereby Appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. Concluding para. Therefrom reads as under thus:-- "A copy of the relevant Rules have been placed on record. According to the Rules, M.A. Second Division is the prerequisite for promotion from BS-17 to 18. Since the appellant is admittedly M.A. 3rd Division, therefore, he is not entitled to promotion from BS-17 to B-18. Even otherwise, the question for the fitness for promotion is to be determined by the Department Authority and not by this Court."
2. A perusal of above para. From the impugned judgment indicates that petitioner has been non- suited on the ground that he was not eligible for promotion for BPS-17 to BPS-18 because he had passed M.A. Examination in 3rd Division. Learned counsel by making reference to Item No.5 from the Punjab Education Department (Schools Education) Recruitment Rules, 1987, as amended from time to time, contended that requirement of possessing degree at least of 2nd Division in M.A. Is meant for those candidates who had applied for initial recruitment against A 33% quota, whereas candidates whose cases were covered under 67% of promotion quota, amongst S.S.Ts. For the posts of Headmaster/ Headmistress are not required to at least possess 2nd Division in M.A. For reference Item No.5 pointed out by the learned counsel is reproduced hereinbleow : -- 1.2.3.4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Headmaster/Headmistress High Schools with enrolment less than 1500(i) M.A./M.Sc. (2nd Div.) Provided that for those who are M.A.
(English) (3Div.) the same conditionshall apply as mentioned in column (5):(i) 33% initial recruitment Deputy Headmaster/ Deputy Headmistress High School with enrolment 1500 or above(ii) 67% by promotion from amongst SSTs Note-1. SSTs on strength Of the Education Department immediately before enforcement Deputy District Education Officer/Subject Specialist Elementary College and Higher Secondary School (BS-17)(ii) B.Ed. (2nd Div.)(iii)
For promotion to post of Subject Specialists, the above-mentioned qualifications in the relevant subjectThese rules, will be eligible for promotion asHeadmaster/Headmistress/ Deputy District Education Officer without having M.A./M.Sc: Degree but shall not be eligible for posting as Subject Specialists or forpromotion to the posts in BS-18 without possession of M.A./ M.Sc./ M.Ed./ M.A. (Education)
Note-II. Subject Specialists shall not be eligible for posting as Headmaster/Headmistress/ Deputy District Education Officer unless they have served as Subject Specialist for a period of ten years similarly Headmaster/Headmistress/ Deputy District Education Officer shall not be eligible for posting as subject Specialists unless they have served as such for a period of ten years.
3. After hearing learned counsel for petitioner and having gone through the impugned judgment carefully, we are of the opinion that contention so raised by the learned counsel, in view of the above provisions of the Schedule to the Rules, requires consideration, as such leave to appeal is granted.
4. Learned counsel further contended that on the same subject, learned Service Tribunal had taken a different view in some of the cases, wherein candidatures of the candidates, who possess degree of M.A. In 3rd Division, have been rejected. In this behalf he made reference to one of the judgments, which has been challenged before this Court in Civil Petition No.1178-L of 2004. He further contended that said C.P.S.L.A. Be heard and disposed of along with the appeal arising out of instant petition.
' Order accordingly. As short point is involved in the matter and petitioner is going to be retired on attaining the age of superannuation, therefore, office is directed to fix the appeal arising out of instant petition along with above-noted petition for leave to appeal, after two months at Islamabad, subject to soliciting necessary approval from Honourable Chief Justice.