MUHAMMAD ARSHAD vs SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, ELECTRICITY, WAPDA, ISLAMABAD And Another
The petitioner challenged the promotion of respondent No. 2, seeking redress before the Federal Service Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, invoking the second proviso to Section 4(1) of the Service Tribunals Act 1973, which bars appeals against departmental orders determining the fitness or otherwise of a person for appointment or promotion to a higher grade. The petitioner sought leave to appeal against this decision before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that the departmental authority had duly considered the petitioner and found him unfit for promotion. The Court affirmed that seniority is not the sole criterion for promotion and that the determination of fitness for a higher post falls within the exclusive domain of the departmental authority. Consequently, the Court ruled that no question of law was involved in the petition, as the Tribunal correctly applied the statutory bar regarding fitness determinations. Leave to appeal was refused, and the petition was dismissed.
- Does an appeal lie to the Federal Service Tribunal against a departmental order determining the fitness of a person for promotion?
- Is seniority the sole criterion for promotion to a higher grade?
- Does the determination of fitness for promotion by a departmental authority involve a question of law?
- Section 4(1), Service Tribunals Act 1973
ORDER
1. ABDUL QADEER CHAUDHRY, J.---The petitioner is aggrieved by the promotion of Sher Ali, respondent No.2. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal. The Tribunal rejected the appeal on the ground that it was tarred by second proviso to section 4(1) of the Service Tribunal Act; according to which no appeal shall lie to the Tribunal against an order of a departmental authority determining the fitness or otherwise of a person to be appointed or hold a particular post or to be appointed to a higher grade. The case of the petitioner was considered by the competent authority and he was not found to be a fit person for promotion. Seniority is not the only criterion for promoting an officer to the higher grade. The departmental authority has not considered him fit to be appointed to the higher post. No question of law is involved in this petition.
2. Leave to appeal is refused and the petition is dismissed.