MUHAMMAD YOUNAS MINHAS vs SECRETARY, IMMIGRATION AND PASSPORTS, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD ,
Civil petition for leave to appeal was filed before the Supreme Court of Pakistan against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, which dismissed the petitioner's service appeal concerning his claim for promotion as Superintendent from the date his alleged juniors were promoted. The petitioner, serving as a Stenotypist, challenged promotions made in 1981 after his departmental representation had already been rejected in 1982. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal on grounds of limitation, the petitioner's explicit undertaking refusing transfer outside his home station, failure to pass the required departmental examination, and distinct cadre rules reserving the post of Superintendent exclusively for promotion from Upper Division Clerks (UDCs). The Supreme Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, holding that the reasons given by the Tribunal suffered from no legal infirmity. Consequently, the Supreme Court refused leave to appeal, reiterating that a civil servant refusing posting outside their home town and belonging to a different cadre without the requisite qualifications cannot claim promotion against cadre rules.
- Whether an employee who gives an undertaking refusing posting outside his home town is entitled to be considered for promotion?
- Whether an employee from a separate cadre can claim promotion to a post reserved exclusively for another cadre under service rules?
- Whether failure to pass a mandatory departmental examination precludes a civil servant from claiming parity in promotion with colleagues who qualified the examination?
' AJMAL MIAN, J.---This is a petition of leave to appeal against the judgment dated 16-2-1993 passed by the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal, in Appeal No, 232(L) for 1991 filed by the petitioner praying that the respondents be directed to consider the petitioner for promotion as Superintendent from the date his juniors were promoted, dismissing the same for the following reasons:- " The appellant has challenged the promotion of M/s. Muhammad Aslam Khan, Abdul Alim Khan and S. Istiaq All and it is a matter of 1981. From the record, it is clear that his representation for the same cause of action was rejected on 29-5-1982. He did not come to the Tribunal and rather started making representations from time to time upto 1989. However, in spite of this limitation, we have considered the other aspects of the case on merits, The appellant has not challenged the seniority. He is working as Stenotypist. He himself gave undertaking that on promotion he will.Not go outside Faisalabad due to his family circumstances. In these circumstances, in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court reported in 1991 SCM R 1526 (Mushtaq Ahmad v. WAPDA), he is not entitled to be considered for any promotion unless and until he is willing to go outside his home town. Not only this, the other factors due to which he has not been considered for promotion are that he did not qualify the departmental examination whereas the respondents qualified the said examination and were accordingly given promotions. The appellant being a Stenotypist can get promotion as Stenographer in his cadre 'and according to the rules, the post of Superintendent being a 100% promotion post from U.D.Cs. He has no case to agitate. On this, the learned counsel for the appellant has not pointed out any discrepancy in the rules by which his rights have been jeopardised."
' The petitioner has, therefore, filed present petition for leave to appeal.
2. In support of the above petition Chaudhry Mushtaq Massood, learned counsel for the petitioner, has vehemently contended that the Tribunal was not justified in dismissing the petitioner's above appeal.
' The above contention seems to be not tenable. Reasons found favour with the Tribunal did not suffer from any infirmity. Leave is refused.