Mian MUHAMMAD ASLAM vs FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary to the Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Interior, Islamabad and 4 other
This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, which accepted respondent No. 4's appeal and declared him senior to the petitioner with a preferential right of promotion as Head Constable. The petitioner contended that he belonged to the investigation wing of the Federal Investigation Agency while respondent No. 4 belonged to the Technical Wing, forming separate cadres and groups under the applicable service rules, specifically rules 12 and 13 of the Federal Investigation Agency (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1975. The Supreme Court considered the arguments that members of different cadres and groups cannot claim seniority or promotion rights across separate service lines, and holding that the contentions raised questions of law of public importance, granted leave to appeal.
- Whether employees belonging to different groups and cadres in the Federal Investigation Agency can claim seniority against each other for promotion?
- Does the Federal Investigation Agency (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1975 restrict promotions within distinct administrative groups?
- Rule 12, Federal Investigation Agency (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules 1975
- Rule 13, Federal Investigation Agency (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules 1975
ORDER
' MUHAMMAD MUNIR KHAN, J.---This petition for leave to appeal which is directed against the judgment dated 15-8-1994 passed by the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad arises from the facts that Muhammad Jaafar (respondent No,4) was appointed as Constable in the technical Branch of F.I.A., Islamabad on 30-5-1977, whereas Mian Muhammad Aslam (petitioner) joined the service of F.I.A. (investigation/crime/executive group) as Constable on 9-11-1978. In the combined provisional seniority list of Constables of F.I.A., the.Name of Muhammad Jaafar (respondent No,4) appeared at Serial No,20 and the name of Mian Muhammad Aslam (petitioner) at Serial No,39. It so happened that on 16-1-1994, Mian Muhammad Aslam (petitioner) was promoted as Head Constable. Feeling aggrieved, Muhammad Jaafar (respondent No,4) filed an appeal before the Director-General F.I.A.
On 21-4-1994, he received reply to the effect that he was at Serial No,5 in the seniority list of the Constable of Technical Wing of F.I.A. Headquarters and will be considered for promotion on his turn.
So, he filed appeal before the Service Tribunal which was accepted on 15-8-1994 declaring that he (Muhammad Jaafar) being senior to Mian Muhammad Aslam (petitioner) had preferential right of promotion as Head Constable.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner belonged to investigation wing of F.I.A. While respondent No,4 was serving in the Technical Wing, which formed different cadres under the Service Regulations. The learned counsel specifically relied on rules 12 and 13 of the Federal Investigation Agency (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1975, which read as under:--
12. For the purposes of promotion, direct appointment and transfer the posts in the Federal Investigating Agency will be placed in the following groups, namely :
(i) Investigation.
(ii) Accounts.
(iii) Customs.
(iv) Income-tax.
(v) Engineering.
(vi) Legal.
' These groups may, for the smooth administration of the Agency and with the prior approval of the Federal Government, be added to or modified as may be considered appropriate by the Director- General.
13. (1) Appointments by promotion shall ordinarily be made within the Groups Mentioned in rule 12 by promotion of officers and staff working in the next lower Grade or rank on the recommendation of the appropriate Departmental Promotion Committee or the Central Selection Board, as the case may be.
(2) Only those persons who are employed on regular basis in the Agency shall be considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee for promotion.
(3) Persons appointed in the Agency by transfer can be considered for promotion only after they have been selected to serve the Agency on regular basis."
Learned counsel for the petitioner accordingly contended that the petitioner and respondent No,4 having been placed in different cadres, the promotion of petitioner could not be affected by reasons of respondent No,4 being senior in service.
3. The above contentions raise questions of law of public importance and we accordingly grant leave to appeal to consider the same.