NUSRAT IQBAL and others vs CH. FAQEER MUHAMMAD, DIRECTOR, AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING, MULTAN REGION, MULTAN
This matter arises from a contempt petition or implementation proceedings regarding the non-compliance of an earlier order dated 13-7-2005 passed in Writ Petition No. 172-2005/BWP. The respondent, Director of Agricultural Engineering, appeared in person and explained that a Departmental Promotion Committee was convened but decided to hold the matter pending due to the absence of framed service rules for the petitioners' posts, though the Director had requested the Director-General to frame the necessary rules. The core legal question concerned the remedy for petitioners facing delayed promotion due to the departmental failure to frame service rules. The court held that while the literal terms of the previous order were complied with, the grievance remained unaddressed, and directed the Director-General of Agriculture to expedite the framing of rules or pass an appropriate legal order regarding the petitioners' promotion within two months. The key principle laid down is that departments cannot indefinitely delay employee promotions by failing to frame service rules.
- Can a department indefinitely delay employee promotions on the ground that service rules have not been framed?
- What is the appropriate course of action when an order directing consideration for promotion is met with administrative inaction due to missing rules?
ORDER
' SH. HAKIM ALI, J---Through this petition, it has been complained that order dated 13-7-2005 passed in Writ Petition No,172- 2005/BWP (Nusrat Iqbal and others v. Government of Punjab and others) has not been complied with. Faqir Muhammad, Director, Agriculture, Multan has appeared in person and states that in compliance with that order passed by this Court, a Departmental Promotion Committee was convened for 10-8-2005 and the Departmental Promotion Committee had directed to hold back the matter as pending, as there were no rules framed by the concerned competent authority for the posts of petitioners. Therefore, the respondent could not do more than this. It has also been stated by aforesaid Director that he has already moved Director-General of the Department for the framing of the rules and imparting of instructions for the promotion of the petitioners.
2. In the above-noted circumstances, although order dated 13-7-2005, has been complied with by respondents yet the grievance of the petitioners has not been resolved and redressed. The petitioners, who are roaming here and there, since long have not been granted promotion in the Department, which is a lamentable state of affairs. I have noted that on 16-5-1985, one Muhammad Wasi, Ledger Keeper was promoted as Accounts Assistant in BPS-7 on regular basis. But for the present petitioners, the insufficiency or non-framing of the rules, plea has been A agitated. In these circumstances, I consider it appropriate and just that the Director-General be reminded through this order that the case of the petitioners be decided as early as possible with regard to framing of rules or any other appropriate legal order may be passed with regard to their promotion, preferably within two months from the date of receipt of order of this Court. The petition is at present disposed of. Copy of this order be conveyed to Director-General, Agriculture, Field, Punjab, Lahore. The action taken or order passed shall be conveyed to the Deputy Registrar of this Court also.