HAMID ALI QURESHI vs DIRECTORGENERAL, AUDIT AND ACCOUNTS, WORKS, LAHORE and others
The petitioner, a civil servant, sought leave to appeal against a Service Tribunal judgment that dismissed his claim for seniority from an earlier date. The petitioner, originally a pre-integration employee in N.-W.F.P., had requested and was granted allocation to Punjab following the disintegration of West Pakistan. Upon his transfer, his previous service was not reckoned for seniority purposes, with the authorities counting his seniority only from the date he opted for the new office rather than his initial confirmation date. The core legal question was whether a civil servant who voluntarily opts for allocation to a different province upon the disintegration of West Pakistan is entitled to retain seniority from their original service period. The Supreme Court held that the petitioner, having opted for the transfer at his own request, was subject to the conditions of such relaxation, which required the surrender of previous seniority. The Court affirmed the Service Tribunal's decision, ruling that the denial of seniority was in accordance with the applicable law regarding civil servants at the time of provincial disintegration. Leave to appeal was refused.
- Does a civil servant who voluntarily opts for transfer to another province upon the disintegration of West Pakistan retain their previous seniority?
- Is the surrender of previous seniority a valid condition for a civil servant seeking relaxation of rules upon provincial disintegration?
- Article 212(3), Constitution of Pakistan 1973
' SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.---The petitioner, a civil servant seeks leave to appeal under Article 212(3) of the Constitution against the judgment of the Service Tribunal dated 15th of March, 1987, whereby his appeal, claiming seniority from an earlier date, was dismissed.
2. The petitioner was a pre-integration employee having joined service in N.-W.F.P., in the Office of the Comptroller, Northern .Area Peshawar, on 15-3-1955. On the disintegration of West Pakistan, he was to be repatriated to his original Province. The petitioner represented and sought his allocation in Punjab and posting in Lahore. His request was allowed and he was not repatriated to his original Province. In allocating his seniority in Punjab in the Office of the Director-General, Audit and Accounts, Works Lahore, his previous service was not reckoned. He wanted his seniority to be counted from 22-11-1962 when he was confirmed in that Office and not from 17-2-1972 when he opted for it. The Service Tribunal denied him the benefit.
3. Mr.Muhammad Rafique Chohan, Advocate, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that as he had rendered this service in the Department where he continued to remain posted, he could not be denied the benefit of it. It was also contended that his domicile was Punjab and he was rightly allocated to the Office in Lahore.
4. Having admitted in his appeal before the Tribunal that he was a pre-integration employee of N.- W.F.P., and the Service Tribunal having held that he was a domicile of N.-W.F.P., the petitioner cannot claim any benefit from his domicile in Punjab, if at all it was so, or for having rendered service during the period of integration in the Province of West Pakistan, when he opted to seek a relaxation of the law applicable to civil servants at the time of disintegration of the Province. One of the conditions attaching to such relaxations was that if it was at their request and option, then they had to surrender their previous seniority and it is exactly that principle which had been applied against the petitioner in denying him the seniority. The principle of fixation of seniority upheld by the Tribunal is in accordance with the law applicable to the case. Leave to appeal is, therefore, refused.