FAZAL KARIM vs PUNJAB SERVICE TRIBUNAL through Chairman and others
The petitioner, a selection grade Stenographer (BS-16) and Private Secretary (BS-17) by move-over, sought two advance increments for acquiring an LL.B. degree. After his representation to the provincial government remained unresponded and his complaint before the Ombudsman was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, he appealed to the Punjab Service Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed his appeal, leading to the present petition for leave to appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The core legal question was whether an LL.B. degree constitutes a higher qualification in the relevant field for a Stenographer to entitle them to advance increments under government policy. The Supreme Court held that a law degree is not a higher qualification in the relevant field for a senior scale Stenographer, distinguishing previous judicial precedents that applied to court staff whose duties justified such increments. The petition was dismissed and leave to appeal was declined, establishing that advance increments for higher qualifications require the qualification to be directly relevant to the specific duties of the post held.
- Whether an LL.B. degree is a higher qualification in the relevant field for a senior scale Stenographer to claim advance increments?
- Does the acquisition of a higher qualification automatically entitle a civil servant to advance increments regardless of the nature of their duties?
- Are precedents concerning court staff applicable to administrative stenographers regarding the grant of advance increments for a law degree?
ORDER
' SYED JAMSHED ALI, J.--- The petitioner, a selection grade Stenographer (BS-16) and by virtue of move-over in BS-17, designated as Private Secretary (BS-17), filed a representation before the Secretary, Services of the Government of the Punjab for the grant of two advance increments on acquiring LL.B. Degree, a qualification higher than the one prescribed under the rules for the post of senior scale Stenographer. It remained unresponded. He then approached a learned Ombudsman, Punjab but his complaint was dismissed on the ground of want of jurisdiction on which he filed an appeal before the Punjab Service Tribunal. His case before the learned Tribunal' was based on judgments of the Lahore High Court in Writ Petition No,7784 of 1991, of the N.-W.F.P. High Court in Zarif Khan v. Government of N.-W.F.P. 1996 M LD 833, and of this Court in C.P. No,5-F, 6-F of 1996. The appeal was dismissed vide judgment dated 24-3-2001.
2. The petitioner has appeared in person and has reiterated the contention that he was entitled to two advance increments for acquiring LL.B. Degree. He also raised the plea of discrimination. The representative of the Finance Department was in attendance who brought to our notice for the first time it was vide Finance Department Circular No,FD.PR.12-3/91, dated 14-4-1997 that the officials in BS-16 were also declared entitled to advance increments for acquiring higher qualification provided that the same was "in the relevant field".
3. We have considered the submissions. Law degree cannot be said to be a higher qualification "in his own field" in respect of a senior scale Stenographer: The judgments of the Lahore High Court, the N.-W.F.P. High Court and this Court related to the Court staff and, keeping in view the nature of their duties they were rightly held entitling to advance increments. There is no merit in this petition which is dismissed and leave declined.