MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE Versus SECRETARY GOVT. OF PAKISTAN

ORDER

MUHAMMAD BASHIR KHAN JEHANGIRI, J.‑Leave to appeal is sought to assail a judgment dated 1‑6‑1995 passed by the Federal Service Tribunal whereby the petitioner's claim for grant of premature increment in BPS‑15 with effect from l‑&1992 was not entertained.

2. Muhammad Sidique , petitioner, who is serving as Physical Education Instructor in a School under the Federal Directorate of Education, Islamabad, was provisionally allowed BPS‑15 with effect from 1‑6‑1992 subject to verification by the A.G.P.R, Islamabad. The A.G.P.R., Islamabad, after verification, advised respondent No.2 to issue formal order granting the petitioner Selection Grade in BPS‑15. The issuance of formal order was however, withheld. The ‑petitioner, feeling aggrieved, preferred an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal for the grant of premature increment in B‑15. The claim of the petitioner was resisted primarily on the plea that on the authority of O.M.No.F.1(2)/R.I/91‑762, dated 18‑7‑1991 issued by the Finance Division the petitioner not being a Graduate in 2nd Division was disentitled to regular BPS‑15.

2. The Federal Service Tribunal held that as "there is no order, whether original or appellate, which could be appealed against as required under the provisions of section 4(1) of the Service Tribunals Act (1‑XX of 1973), therefore, the appeal is incompetent and not maintainable". On merits, the view expressed was that in pursuance of Column No3 against entry at Serial No3 of O.M. No.F.1(2)/R.1/91‑762, dated 18‑7‑1991 issued by the Finance Division 1/3rd of the total strength of the P.T.Is., who were holding qualifications of BA./B.Sc. 2nd Division plus professional prescribed qualifications were entitled to be placed in Selection Grade (B‑15) and, therefore, the case of the petitioner who lacked the aforesaid educational qualification of 'BA. 2nd Division' was not covered by the Office Memorandum referred to above. The appeal was thus dismissed.

3. Raja Abdul Ghafoor, learned Advocate‑on‑Record, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, contended that failure on the part of the Department to respond to the appeal for grant of selection per se was tantamount to refusal and furnished a valid cause of action to the petitioner. On merits, the learned Advocate‑on‑Record submitted that the qualification of B.A. 2nd Division was not a condition precedent for grant of regular selection grade and that, in any case, the Tribunal had legally erred to rely on the mere contents of the Office Memorandum referred to above inasmuch as in the earlier Office Memorandums No.F.1(2)‑Imp‑H/91, dated 19‑8‑1991 and 3‑6‑1992 issued by the Finance Division, "the civil employees who had been awarded selection grade prior to 1‑6‑1991 and were serving in selection grade posts on that day were also allowed one premature increment for the purpose of fixation of pay with effect from l‑6-1991. According to the learned counsel, the respondents were not competent to have added the qualification ‑ of 2nd Division for graduate P.T.Is.

4. We have decided to refrain from making any observations on the competency and maintainability or otherwise of the appeal because we find that on merits the petitioner has no case. The learned counsel has not been able to convince us that the Finance Division was not competent to prescribe the qualification of B.A. 2nd Division for grant of regular selection grade to the P.T.Is. The Finance Division or for that matter a Department or a Division does not appear to be debarred to prescribe and/or revise educational or professional qualifications for the enhancement of efficiency in the service or cadre. The proposition has been settled by this Court in the precedent case of Government of N.‑WF.P. v. Dr. Sheikh Muzaffar Iqbal and others (1990 SCMR 1321) that the Government has the right to enhance the qualifications and standards for recruitment and promotion in order, to maintain efficiency in service. In this contex4 we can do no better than borrow the following observations made in para. 13 by a Full Bench of this Court in a recent case of Fida Hussain v. The Secretary, Kashmir Affairs and Northern Affairs Division, Islamabad and another (PLD 1995 SC 701):‑‑

'We may again observe that it is exclusively within the domain of the Government to decide whether a particular qualification will be considered sufficient for promotion from I particular Grade to a higher Grade and it is also within the domain of the Government to change the above policy from time to time as nobody can claim any vested right in the policy."

5. As a sequel to what has been observed above there is no substance in this petition which is, accordingly, dismissed.

AA./M‑3199/S Petition dismissed.