Professor MUMTAZ ALI KHAN vs GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Establishment Division, Islamabad and 2 others
This petition for leave to appeal arose from a decision of the Service Tribunal regarding the promotion of an Associate Professor in BPS-19 to a BPS-20 post. The petitioner, who claimed to be the senior-most Associate Professor, was bypassed for promotion in favor of a junior colleague on the ground that he failed to achieve the qualifying score. The petitioner contended that as a teacher and principal, he belonged to a specialist cadre, making the instructions in Parts II and III of the Guidelines for Departmental Promotion Committee/Central Selection Board inapplicable to him. The Service Tribunal rejected this contention, finding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate how his role as Principal of a Federal Government College placed him within the specialist cadre. The Supreme Court of Pakistan granted leave to appeal to consider whether Part IV of the guidelines, which explicitly excludes the application of Parts II and III to civil servants in specialist cadres such as teachers and professors, applied to the petitioner's case.
- Whether civil servants in specialist cadres, such as teachers and professors, are exempt from the application of Parts II and III of the Guidelines for Departmental Promotion Committee/Central Selection Board under Part IV thereof?
- Whether the administrative post of Principal of a Federal Government College deprives an Associate Professor of their status within a specialist cadre for promotion purposes?
ORDER
' FAZAL KARIM, J.---The petitioner is an Associate Professor in BPS-19. According to him he was the senior most Associate Professor when a post in B-20 fell vacant. He was considered but "failed to come up to the qualifying score" and the post went to Mr. Sajjad Akbar respondent, who was admittedly junior to the petitioner. One of the contentions raised before the Tribunal was that the petitioner belongs to the specialist cadres and the instructions contained in Parts II and III of the Guidelines for Departmental Promotion Committee/Central Selection Board were wrongly applied to him. That contention was repelled by the Tribunal with the observation that the petitioner had "failed to explain that as Principal of the Federal Government College, Cantt. Board how he fell within the cadre of "specialists" to claim exemption of Parts II and III " Learned counsel for the petitioner has called our attention to Part IV of those guidelines to point out that that part itself excludes the application of Parts II and III "to civil servants who are in specialist cadres such as doctors, teachers and professors, research scientists and incumbents of purely technical posts for promotion within their own line of special ism" .
2. Leave to appeal is granted, inter alia, to consider 'his contention. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.