MUHAMMAD MUZAFFAR ABBAS vs PAKISTAN Through Secretary, KANA
This matter concerns a dispute over the seniority of a civil servant in Grade-18, based on an alleged adjustment of seniority in Grade-17. The petitioner contended that the relevant seniority list was kept secret and never circulated. Upon the Court's direction, a departmental representative appeared and candidly admitted that the seniority list, issued in 1992, had indeed never been circulated. The core legal question addressed was how to resolve the petitioner's grievance regarding seniority placement in the absence of a properly circulated list. The Court held that the impugned order must be set aside to allow for the proper circulation of the seniority list. The key principle laid down is that fairness dictates that a civil servant must be provided with the seniority list to enable them to file a departmental representation regarding their placement. Once the list is circulated and the representation is disposed of on merits, the aggrieved party may then approach the Federal Service Tribunal for further redress if necessary.
- Is a seniority list valid if it has been issued but never circulated to the affected civil servants?
- What is the appropriate remedy for a civil servant aggrieved by their placement on a seniority list that was not previously circulated?
- Can a civil servant approach the Federal Service Tribunal before exhausting the departmental representation process regarding seniority?
ORDER
SAJJAD ALI SHAH, CJ..--On the last date of hearing this Court directed that the Chief Engineer, Northern Areas, P.W.D., Gilgit or a responsible departmental representative, who is conversant with the facts of the case, should appear and inform the Court about the date and year-in which the seniority list in question was published. The petitioner before us claims seniority in Grade-18 on the basis of adjustment of seniority in Grade-17 and according to him the seniority list was kept secret and was not circulated at all. We made the above direction in order to have clarification with regard to issue and circulation of the seniority list. In compliance, the learned Deputy Attorney- General states that the Chief Engineer is unable to appear in the Court for the reason that he is out of country and in his place Mr. Akhtar Hussain, Administrative Officer, who is conversant with the facts of the case and has also brought the record, is present in the Court to answer queries if there are any. This officer has very candidly admitted that the seniority list in question was issued in 1992 but was never circulated. It is further stated by him that necessary steps are being taken to circulate the seniority list in the manner as it should be very soon.
2. In the circumstances, we are of the view that in all fairness after circulation of the seniority list, the petitioner, if he has any grievance with regard to his placement in the seniority list after circulation, should be allowed to file a departmental representation which should be disposed of on merits after which it would be open to him to approach the Federal Service Tribunal for redress of his grievance if he has any.
The impugned order is set aside and with this observation the petition is disposed of.