HAFIZ SABAHUDDIN JAMY vs OBAIDUR REHMAN KHAN and 4 others
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, which had dismissed the petitioner's appeal regarding his seniority status in government service. The petitioner, who was senior to the respondents in Grades 17, 18, and 19, was dismissed from service in 1976 but subsequently reinstated with full benefits and back pay. During his absence, the respondents were promoted to Grade 20, and the petitioner was promoted to the same grade later in 1978, but placed junior to them. The core legal question is whether the petitioner's seniority should have been restored based on the Establishment Code provisions regarding delayed recommendations by the Selection Board/DPC, and whether the Tribunal erred in its interpretation of these rules. The Supreme Court found that the points raised by the petitioner regarding the applicability of the Establishment Code and the relevance of previous case law required further examination. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal to determine if the petitioner's seniority was correctly determined upon his reinstatement.
- Does the Establishment Code provision regarding delayed Selection Board recommendations apply to a civil servant reinstated after dismissal?
- Whether a civil servant's seniority is preserved when they are promoted to a higher grade after being reinstated with full back benefits?
ORDER
ABDUL QADEER CHAUDHRY, J.---The petitioner was senior to respondents 1 to 4. His seniority was maintained in Grades 17, 18 and 19 in the Gradation List published by the Government of Pakistan upto January, 1976. The petitioner was dismissed from service from 5-11-1976. However, he was reinstated in service with all fringe benefits of service and salary and his period of absence was treated as on duty and the arrears of his pay were duly paid to him, vide notifications date 25-8- 1977 and 6-12-1977. During the petitioner's aforesaid absence from service, the respondents 1 to 4 were promoted to Grade 20. The petitioner was promoted in Grade 20 in April 1978. However, his name was shown below the respondents. The petitioner preferred a representation before the Government. The Government turned down the representation of the petitioner maintaining the same position while promoting the petitioner and respondents 1 to 4 in Grade 21. The petitioner approached the Federal Service Tribunal for placing him senior to the respondents 1 to 4. The Service Tribunal dismissed his appeal. Hence this petition for leave to appeal against the aforesaid judgment of the Tribunal.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Tribunal has erred in holding that the petitioner's case is not covered by clause B of Para.(b) at page 154 of Establishment Code which reads as hereunder:-- "(b) When in a single reference, the Selection Board/DPC are asked to recommend more than one persons and the recommendation of the Selection Board/DPC is held up in respect of one or more such persons for want of complete papers etc., or for reasons beyond the control of the persons concerned, the recommendation of the Selection Board/DPC in respect of such persons when made subsequently will be deemed to have been made on the date when the recommendation in respect of the original batch was made."
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that M. Iqbal Junejo's case cited as PLD 1987 SC 247 does not apply to the case of the petitioner. The point raised by the learned counsel requires examination.
Leave is granted.
4. The appeal to be prepared on the present record with liberty to the parties to file additional documents if they so desire.