MURAD KHAN Versus PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary Gilgit-Baltistan, Gilgit

MUMTAZ AHMED, CHAIRMAN.---- Since in both appeals, the appellants have claim same relief for the promotion from Patwari to Girdwari , therefore, through this single judgement, we intend to dispose them and Service Appeal No. "84/2023" titled as " Murad Khan v. Provincial Government and others " filed by Murad Khan is taken as lead appeal.

2) The appellant has prayed as under: -

3) Succinctly the facts of case, as enumerated in the service appeal one that the applicants are employees of Gilgit Baltistan Revenue Department and serving as Patwaris (BPS-09) and as per recruitment rules of Revenue Department of Gilgit Baltistan the post of Girdawar (BPS-11) is to be filled 100% by promotion from the feeding post of Patwari and the line of promotion to the post of Girdawar (BPS-11) to be filled on the basis of seniority at Division level. The senior most Patwari of the divisions are promoted against the vacant post. According to appellant the seniority lists were requisition from all the Deputy Commissioners of Gilgit-Division and the Deputy Commissioners have furnished. The list of Patwaris as per their seniority in the Commissioner office Gilgit. As per list furnished by DC(s) the appellant Murad Khan (Service Appeal No. 84/2023) is at serial No. 1 and Ahsan Ul Hag (Service Appeal No. 85/2023) is at serial No. 2. Despite being senior amongst the Patwaris the respondents wilfully and with malice not promoted the appellant and attempted to grant promotion to junior to them, being their blue-eyed patwaris.

4) Being aggrieved of the act of the respondents the appellant knocked the constitutional jurisdiction of the Hon'ble GB Chief Court under Article 82(2) of Gilgit Baltistan Order, 2018 through Writ Petition No. "371/2023" for their redressal. Later on, after the establishment of Gilgit Baltistan Service Tribunal, the writ petition was abated and appellant was directed to approach the Gilgit Baltistan Service Tribunal for redressal of grievances.

5) After passing of the above order by the Hon'ble GB Chief Court, the appellant filed this service appeal.

6) The respondents/department resisted the appeal and filed parawise comments wherein they raised certain preliminary objections coupled with appeal filed without exhausting departmental forum.

7) Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the appellant is the senior most Patwari in the division as per seniority list issued by the concerned Deputy Commissioner and no objection has been filed by any of the Patwaris; argued that after determination of final seniority list the appellant was the senior most Patwari in the Gilgit division and he was entitled for promotion for the post of Girdawar; argued that the Commissioner Gilgit with mala fide intention and ulterior motive just to deprive the appellant from his legal right, has transferred respondents Nos. 7 and 8 , vide impugned order dated 09.6.2023 against the post of Girdawar, just to create a chaos between the seniors and juniors and to knock out the appellant from the lawful promotion; contented that in similar case pertaining to Diamer-Astore Division and Baltistan Division, where promotion to post of Girdawar at divisional level was made strictly on the basis of seniority amongst the Patwaris; submits however, in the case in hand, the appellant has been treated differently, where intending with malice intention to promote junior Patwaris by ignoring appellant's seniority, only to adjust, accommodate, favour their blue-eyed Patwaris; argued that discriminatory treatment with the appellant is in clear cut violation of Estacode as well as against the Gilgit Baltistan Civil Servant (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules and against the settled principles laid down by superior courts of Pakistan; learned counsel further argued that the act of the respondents by ignoring the appellant's seniority and extending undue favour to juniors, is arbitrary, discriminatory and violation of settled principles of service laws and promotion rules, framed thereof. Finally, request of acceptance of appeal as prayed for.

8) On the other hand, learned law officer vehemently opposed the appeal and argued the claim of the appellant is untenable false and there is no such rules or provisions to promote the Girdawar at Divisional level, however, the competent authority/Commissioner is empowered for posting transfer of Girdawar at Divisional level for smooth running of the business of the office.

9) Heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and gone through the record with their able assistance.

The only question before this Hon'ble Tribunal is that: -

On careful examination of document of Gilgit Baltistan Board of Revenue bearing No. Admin-3(2)/(Promo)/BOR/2020 dated 24.7.2024, it reveals that vacancy position of Girdawar (BS-11) in district Diamer and Baltistan Division were promoted on Divisional level amongst the senior most Patwaris of the respective Division. However, in the instant case the respondents willfully and deliberately just to deny the right of appellant and favor their blue eyed patwaris and bent upon to promote the juniors to the appellants, which adversely affected the seniority of appellant. We observed that the act of the respondents is arbitrary, fanciful and discriminatory. Moreover, the act of respondents is against their own settled principles and violate then own rules and procedure, wherein, in Baltistan Division and Diamer-Astore Division , the promotion of patwaris are made at divisional level and whereas when comes the turn of promotion of the appellant they deliberately and willfully just to favor their own favorites, ignoring the promotion on divisional level. It is also noted that when the transfer/posting of Girdawar are made on Divisional level then the promotion should be also required to be made on divisional level.

It is pertinent to mention, that on the direction of the Tribunal order dated 23.10.2024, the Commissioner, Gilgit appeared before this Tribunal and stated that the posting order of Respondents Nos. 9 and 10 was on administrative ground to run the business of the Commissioner office, therefore, the seniority of the appellant will not effect at all, to promote them.

The upshot of the above discussion, both service Appeals bearing Nos. 84/2023 and 85/2023, are hereby allowed and the official respondents are directed to promote senior most/eligible Patwaris (BS-09) to Girdawar (BS-10 at Divisional level.

Appeal is disposed off in the above terms. Office is directed to intimate parties accordingly.

MQ/2/GBST Appeals allowed.