M. A. MAJID vs GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN

ORDER

1. SALAHUDDIN AHMED. J.--The petitioner has been aggrieved by an order of the Service Tribunal, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad, dismissing his appeal.

2. It appears that the petitioner first joined as clerk in the Defence Department sometime in the year 1939 before Independence. He claims that subsequently lie was promoted to the post of Assistant Deputy Director General Pakistan Telegraph and Telephone Department on the 28th of April, 1970.

3. He further states that as a result of a memorandum dated the 14th of April, 1970, issued under the signature of the Chief Engineer the petitioner was Entitled to a special pay of Rs. 275 per month. His grievance is that this special of pay Rs. 275 per month has not been allowed to him in full inasmuch as he was allowed special pay at the rate of 15 % of the substantive pay for the period in question, namely, the 14th of April, 1970 to the 20th of December. 1972. The petitioner retired with effect from the 21st of December, 1973.

4. The Service tribunal refused to accept the claim of the petitioner and dismissed the appeal. The Service Tribunal found that the petitioner was neither promoted nor appointed to s higher post and that the Director General was not competent to take such appointee. The Tribunal was further of the opinion that the petitioner had been paid special pay at a reason--able rate for-the whole period prior to actual appointment and was actually paid at the full rate since his appointment and, therefore, the ends of justice had been adequately met. Under Article 212 of the Constitution the Service Tribunal has exclusive jurisdiction in respect of matter relating to the terms and conditions of persons who are or have been in service of Pakistan, and an appeal lies to the Supreme Court from the order of the Service Tribunal only if the Supreme Court is satisfied that the can involves a substantial question of law of public importance. (The underlining' is ours). The learned counsel appearing in support of the petitioner has fatted to place before us any such question of law.

5. The contention that the aforesaid memorandum dated the 14th of April, 1970, was an order passed by the President and the Chief Martial Law Administrator and that it was wrongly construed by the Tribunal, is without any force. The memorandum as will be seen presently is of a general character and shows that the temporary post of an Administrative Officer in the T. & T. Directorate-General, Karachi, was converted into that of Assistant Deputy Director-General (Administration) upon usual terms and conditions. Furthermore that the new post was reserved for promotion from the ministerial staff of the Directorate-General. Karachi. The memorandum is as follows:- "PAKISTAN TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE DEPARTMENT Office of the Director-General, Telegraph and Telephone.

6. No. S. 31. 10/66. Karachi, the 14th April, 1970.

7. Subject: Conversion of the post of Administrative Officer in the T&T Directorate-General, Karachi, into that of Assistant Deputy Director-General (Administration).

8. The President and C. M. L. A. Is pleased to sanction the conversion, with immediate effect of the temporary post of Administrative Officer in the T&T Directorate-General, Karachi, into that of Assistant Deputy Director-General (Administration), on the usual terms and conditions.

2. The incumbent of the post will draw pay in his own scale in Class-II plus a special pay of Rs. 275 p. m. The present method of recruitment to the post of Administrative Officer herein converted will mutatls murandis apply to the new pest, which will be reserved for promotion from the Ministerial staff of the Directorate. General, Karachi.

3. The expenditure involved is debitable to the head Pay of Officers' in Abstract C. L. A. And should be met from the sanctioned grant of the T&T Directorate-General.

9. (Sd.) (Mehboob Khan)

10. Chief Engineer (S&E:)

11. It it, thus, seen that the post of an Assistant Deputy Director. General was a temporary post and it was to be filled in by promotion from the ministerial staff of the Directorate-General, Karachi. The Tribunal found that the petitioner was neither promoted nor appointed to the post of Assistant Deputy Director-General by any competent authority. This finding of the Service Tribunal was within its exclusive jurisdiction and does not appear to us to be illegal.

12. The petition is accordingly dismissed.