Mrs. SHAHIDA SAADULLAH vs SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD and others
This matter arises from a petition directed against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, which dismissed the petitioner's appeal concerning her claim of seniority over respondents Nos. 4 and 6. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Programmer and subsequently promoted as Programmer in Grade-18, and later posted as System Analyst in Grade-18. Respondents Nos. 4 and 6 were appointed as System Analysts in Grade-18 against direct recruitment quotas after the petitioner's promotion date. In a circulated seniority list, the petitioner was placed below the respondents. Her claim before the Tribunal was that since the posts of Programmer and System Analyst were in the same Grade-18 and were subsequently merged, her seniority should be counted from the date of her regular promotion to Grade-18, making her senior to the respondents. The Tribunal dismissed her appeal, leading to the present petition. The core legal question is whether an official's seniority in Grade-18 should be reckoned from the date of regular promotion to that grade when posts are subsequently merged. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to consider the contentions raised, holding that the arguments require detailed consideration.
- Whether seniority in Grade-18 is to be reckoned from the date of regular promotion when posts within the same grade are subsequently merged?
- Does a civil servant acquire seniority over direct recruits appointed to the same grade at a later date following promotion to that grade?
ORDER
' ABDUL HAFEEZ MEMON, J.---This petition is directed against the judgment, dated 3-9-1995, passed by the Federal Service Tribunal, whereby it dismissed the appeal of the petitioner against her claim of seniority over respondents Nos.4 and 6.
2. The petitioner Mrs. Shahida Saadullah was appointed as Assistant Programmer in Grade B-17 in Pakistan Computer Bureau. She was promoted as Programmer in Grade B-18 w.e.f, 20-1-1982, vide Notification, dated 26-1-1982. She was thereafter promoted/posted as System Analyst in the same Grade B-18 w.e.f, 16-6-1986, vide Notification, dated 26-6-1986. Respondent No,4 Bashir Ahmad Fani and respondent No,6 Amir Sultan were appointed as System Analysts in Grade B-18 against quota of direct recruits on 4-5-1982 and 31-12-1982, respectively. The seniority list of System Analysts, Grade B-18, as on 18-2-1989, was circulated by the department vide memo. Dated 16-10-1994, wherein the petitioner was placed at serial No,4, below respondents Nos.4 and 6, who were respectively placed at Serial Nos.1 and 3. The petitioner's claim before the Tribunal was that inasmuch as two posts of Programmer and System Analyst were in the same Grade-18, which were subsequently merged by the department, her seniority was to be counted from her regular promotion to Grade-18 on 26-1-1982, and when so counted, she was senior to both the respondents, who were appointed System Analysts in the same Grade-18 after her on 4-5-1982 and 31-12-1982. The learned Service Tribunal, however, dismissed the petitioner's appeal. Hence, this petition.
3. Sh. Riazul Haq, learned counsel for the petitioner, repeated the contention raised before the Tribunal and submitted that, inasmuch as both the posts of Programmer and System Analysts were in the same Grade-18 and were subsequently merged, the seniority of the petitioner had to be reckoned from the date when she was promoted in Grade-18 on 20-1-1982, in the regular manner, and on such reckoning, she was senior to both the respondents, who were admittedly appointed in Grade-18 after the petitioner.
4. The contentions raised require consideration. Leave is accordingly granted.