KHURSHEED AHMED vs CHAIRMAN, PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, which had dismissed the petitioner's appeal concerning the effective date of his move-over following reinstatement into service. The petitioner, formerly an Assistant Engineer in the T&T Department, was compulsorily retired, but the Tribunal earlier converted the penalty into the stoppage of three increments. Upon reinstatement without back benefits and treating the intervening period as extraordinary leave without pay, the petitioner claimed entitlement to a move-over from an earlier date. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to claim a move-over and intervening increments during the period of retirement and subsequent extraordinary leave without pay. The Supreme Court held that the petition was devoid of merit, affirming that a break in service and extraordinary leave disentitle an employee from earning increments during that period, and that the requisite formula for move-over, including consecutive favourable annual confidential reports, could not be satisfied during such leave. The petition for leave to appeal was accordingly dismissed.
- Whether an employee is entitled to earn increments during a period of break in service treated as extraordinary leave without pay?
- Can an employee claim a move-over to a higher grade without fulfilling the required formula including consecutive favourable annual confidential reports?
- Whether a previous unchallenged judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal acts as a closed transaction regarding the terms of reinstatement?
ORDER
SAJJAD ALI SHAH, J: --In consequence of disciplinary proceedings, petitioner as Assistant Engineer (B-16) in T&T Department was compulsorily retired with effect from 4-9-1984 but his appeal was allowed by Federal Service Tribunal converting retirement into stoppage of three increments vide judgment dated 27-10-1988. He had already reached maximum of B-16 on 1-12-1983 but could not get move-over on account of retirement. He was reinstated but without back benefits and the period he remained retired was declared to be considered as extraordinary leave without pay.
2. Petitioner approached the Tribunal again with grievance that move---over allowed to him from 1-2-1989 after reinstatement was belated and he was entitled to move-over from 1-12-1984 as he had reached maximum in previous grade on 1-12-1983. Appeal of the petitioner is dismissed for valid reasons that previous judgment of the Tribunal was not challenged in the Supreme Court and has been acted upon by the Government by allowing move-over with clarification in the addendum of 9-2-1989 to the effect that on restoration the order shall not operate to postpone further increments.
3. Contentions raised before us on behalf of the petitioner are untenable. There was break in service when petitioner retired and even if that period is treated as extraordinary leave without pay the same would not entitle him to earn increments during that period. Secondly in grade 16, petitioner had already reached maximum on 1- 12-1983 before he was retired, hence question of increment would arise only when he gets move-over to the next grade. Thirdly for move-over there is formula to be followed including definite number of favourable consecutive annual confidential reports, which could not be possible during the period of extraordinary leave without pay.
4. There is no flaw or legal infirmity in the impugned judgment of the Tribunal requiring interference hence leave is refused and petition is dismissed as without merits.