MUHAMMAD SALEEM-II, STENOGRAPHER, ESTABLISHMENT, ISLAMABAD Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN
This is a petition for leave to appeal directed against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, which dismissed the petitioner's service appeal concerning promotion and deputation. The core legal question was whether a junior stenographer could challenge the deputation of an officer from another department and claim a right to promotion when vacant posts existed and several senior colleagues stood ahead of him in the seniority list. The Supreme Court held that the petitioner, being the junior-most stenographer with five persons senior to him awaiting consideration, had no locus standi or cause of action to challenge the deputation or claim promotion since no junior had been advanced over him. The petition for leave to appeal was accordingly dismissed. The key principle laid down is that a civil servant cannot maintain a grievance regarding promotion or departmental deputations unless a tangible right is infringed or a junior person is promoted in derogation of their seniority.
- Whether a civil servant can claim promotion to a higher post as a matter of right when they are the junior-most employee in their cadre?
- Does the deputation of an officer from another department give a cause of action to a senior-most waiting employee whose turn for promotion has not yet arrived?
- Can a civil servant challenge a promotion or deputation arrangement when several persons senior to them remain on the waiting list?
1. AJMAL MIAN, ACTG. C.J.--- This is a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment dated 9-4-1996 of the learned Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad in Appeal No. 497(R) of 1995 filed by the petitioner for the following relief:
(a) "That respondent No. l be directed to promote/consider the name of the appellant for the post of Private Secretary (BS-17) with effect from the date on which respondent No.6 was illegally/unlawfully taken as Private Secretary i.e. with effect from 12-12-1993 and 25-4-1993.
(b) That respondent No.1 be directed to repatriate respondent No.6 to his parent Department i.e. Statistics Division."
2. The above appeal has been dismissed by the Tribunal for the following reason:
3. "Now coming to the merits of the case, the entire arguments of the appellant were on the appointment of Mr. Khalil Chaudhry as Private Secretary in the Establishment Division. He, however, could not produce any documents whereby it could be shown that Mr. Khalil Chaudhry had ever been appointed in the Establishment Division as Private Secretary. On the other hand, the Establishment Division have made a categorical statement in the comments that Mr. Khalil Chaudhry is working in the Establishment Division as Section Officer on deputation from the Statistics Division and that he was never appointed as Private Secretary. We were further informed that the post of Private Secretary to the Secretary, Establishment Division is still lying vacant and will be filled in accordance with the recruitment rules when considered necessary. The contention of the appellant that the post of Private Secretary had been occupied by Mr. Khalil Chaudhry in violation of the recruitment rules is, therefore, baseless. Besides, admittedly the appellant is the junior most Stenographer and cannot claim promotion to the post of Private Secretary as of right. The appeal has no merits and is liable to be dismissed. "
4. The petitioner being aggrieved by the above order has filed the present petition for leave to appeal.
5. In support of the above petition, the petitioner has vehemently contended that the continuation of respondent No.5 Khalil Ahmed Chaudhry, on deputation as a Section Officer against the post of Private Secretary has adversely affected the petitioner's prospects of promotion as Private Secretary. However, he has candidly conceded that there were 6 vacancies of Police Station in the respondent-department which were filled in on the basis of seniority i.e. the incumbent who were at Serial Nos.1 to 6 of the Seniority List. He has further conceded that his name appears on the Seniority list at Serial No. 12. In other words, before the petitioner can expect his promotion there are 5 persons on waiting list who are senior to him. We are unable to understand as to how the p, petitioner can have grievance when no one junior to him has been promoted as Private Secretary and when there are still 5 persons above him in the Seniority List. The continuation of respondent No.5 as a Section Officer on deputation against the post of Private Secretary, in our view, does not give any cause of action to the petitioner. The view found favour with the Tribunal seems to be correct.
6. Leave to appeal is, therefore, refused and this petition stands dismissed.
7. A.A./M-79/S Leave refused.