MUHARNMADASLAMKHAN Versus CHAIRMAN, PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION CORPORATION
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, which dismissed the petitioner's claim for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (BPS-16) with retrospective effect from June 1985. The petitioner, having obtained a B.Sc. degree in 1985, contended he fulfilled the eligibility criteria for promotion under the relevant service rules. The Tribunal had previously held that the petitioner was considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) in 1988 and found unsuitable, leading to his eventual promotion in 1991 on a seniority-cum-fitness basis. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the Tribunal misread the record regarding the petitioner's consideration by the DPC in 1988. The Supreme Court observed that the Tribunal's finding that the petitioner was considered and rejected in 1988 was a misreading of the record, as the department's position was that he was not eligible for consideration at that time. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal, holding that the petitioner was prima facie eligible for consideration for promotion against the 25 percent quota from 1985.
- Does the mere possession of requisite qualifications for a promotional post automatically entitle a civil servant to promotion?
- Can a Service Tribunal's finding based on a misreading of the record regarding a Departmental Promotion Committee's proceedings be set aside?
- Is a civil servant eligible for consideration for promotion against a quota once they acquire the necessary educational qualifications?
ORDER
ABDUL QADEER CHAUDHRY, J.‑‑ ‑Leave to appeal has been sought against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, dated 6‑7‑1993.
2. The facts in brief are that the petitioner joined T&T Department, as a Telecom. Technician in 1966, He was promoted to the post of Engineering Supervisor (B‑11) with effect from 1‑8‑1977. By Gazette Notification dated September 2, 1981, the Sub‑Engineer, eligible for promotion to BPS‑16 should possess Diploma in Engineering or B.Sc. should have rendered 10 years service in T&T Department and should have also passed the qualifying examination. 25 per cent quota was reserved for persons holding B.Sc. Degrees; the remaining 75% posts of Assistant Engineers (BPS‑16) had to be filled in on seniority‑cum‑fitness basis. It is submitted by the learned counsel that in accordance with SOR‑1977(1)/81, dated 15‑8‑1981, the petitioner fulfilled all qualifications for regular promotion as Assistant Engineer/SDO (BPS‑16) with effect from June, 1985, when he obtained B.Sc. Degree. The petitioner made repeated requests that he be given promotion as Assistant Engineer (BPS‑16) with effect from June, 1985. He was promoted on 27‑5‑1991. Since the petitioner had not been promoted from June 1985, he filed an appeal before the Service Tribunal, which was dismissed by the impugned judgment. The learned Tribunal observed that eligibility is not consideration for promotion, but there are other factors also which are subject to scrutiny by the DPC to assess the suitability and fitness of a person for promotion to a particular post. His case was considered by the DPC held on 5‑7‑1988, but was not approved. He was correctly promoted on his turn on seniority‑cum‑fitness basis on 27‑5 1991."
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that eligibility of the petitioner has been determined by the Tribunal and it is also not disputed by the Department, but the learned Tribunal has erred in holding that his case was considered by the DPC held on 5‑7‑1988. The case of the department is that he was not eligible to be considered in the DPC held on 5‑7‑1988. He was promoted on his turn on seniority‑cum‑fitness basis on 27‑5‑1991. It is, therefore, clear that the petitioner was not considered for promotion in the DPC held on 5‑7‑1.988. There is clear misreading made by the Tribunal. It is not the case of the department that he was not found fit for promotion before 1988. As the petitioner possessed the requisite qualifications for promotion w.e.f. June 1985, therefore, prima facie he was eligible for consideration for regular promotion against 25 per cent quota. Leave to appeal is granted.
AA./M‑1886/S Leave granted.