Pakistan Case LawMUHAMMAD YOUNAS MINHAS Versus SECRETARY, IMMIGRATION AND PASSPORTS, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD
This is a petition for leave to appeal directed against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, which dismissed the petitioner's appeal seeking a direction for consideration for promotion to the post of Superintendent from the date his juniors were promoted. The core legal question revolved around whether the petitioner was entitled to promotion despite delay in approaching the forum, refusing to be transferred outside his home town based on personal undertaking, failing to qualify the required departmental examination, and lacking eligibility under the relevant service rules which designated the post of Superintendent as a promotional post exclusively from Upper Division Clerks (UDCs) while the petitioner belonged to the Stenotypist cadre. The Supreme Court held that the reasons weighed by the Tribunal suffered from no legal infirmity and upheld the dismissal of the appeal. The key principle laid down is that a civil servant who refuses to serve outside his home town and fails to meet mandatory departmental examination and cadre requirements is not entitled to promotion.
- Is a civil servant who refuses to be transferred outside his home town due to family circumstances entitled to claim promotion?
- Can a Stenotypist claim promotion to the post of Superintendent when service rules designate it as a promotion post exclusively from Upper Division Clerks?
- Does failure to qualify the mandatory departmental examination bar a civil servant from claiming promotion?
AJMAL MIAN, J.---This is a petition for 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) of 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 Ali 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 up to 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 'SCMR 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 UDCs, 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 jeopardized."
The petitioner has, therefore, filed present petition for leave to appeal.
2.In support of the above petition Chaudhry Mushtaq Masood, learned counsel for 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.
Judges on this bench
- Ajmal Mian2,984 judgments
- Wali Muhammad Khan585 judgments