ZAHID ARIF vs GOVERNMENT OF N.-W.F.P. through Secretary, S&GAD, Peshawar and 9 others
The petitioner, an engineer serving as an S.D.O., sought leave to appeal against the dismissal of his service tribunal appeal regarding his placement on the seniority list of Assistant Engineers. The core legal question concerned whether a candidate recommended and appointed in a later batch of selection ranks junior to candidates recommended in an earlier batch, notwithstanding a higher merit position. The Supreme Court held that the Service Tribunal correctly applied rule 17(a) of the North-West Frontier (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1989, which mandates that persons selected in an earlier selection rank senior to those selected in a later selection. The petition for leave to appeal was accordingly refused, upholding the principle that initial selection batch seniority prevails over overall merit list positioning between different batches.
- Does a candidate selected in an earlier batch rank senior to a candidate placed higher on the merit list but selected in a later batch?
- Whether the judgment of the Service Tribunal regarding inter se seniority based on selection batches is open to exception?
- Do rules governing appointment, promotion and transfer determine initial selection seniority between different batches?
- Rule 17(a), North-West Frontier (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1989
ORDER
' MAMOON KAZI, ACTG. CJ.---The petitioner, an engineer, was serving as S.D.O. In Building Sub- Division at Peshawar.
2. It may be pointed out that (C & W) Department placed a request with the N.-W.F.P. Public Service Commission for selection of suitable candidates for appointment against quota meant for direct recruitment. The N.-W.F.P.Public Service Commission recommended 10 candidates for appointment. Subsequently, more vacancies occurred and the Commission recommended 8 candidates, including the petitioner, who was placed at Serial No,3 on the merit list. Subsequently, first batch of 12 officers was recommended for appointment in September, 1977, but the same did not include the petitioner. The petitioner was, however, recommended for appointment in the second batch in April, 1978.
3 The respondent department thereafter issued a tentative seniority list of Assistant Engineers, vide order dated 2-7-1989, placing the petitioner's name at Serial No,39. The petitioner felt aggrieved because respondents Nos.3 to 10 had been shown senior to him. However, the petitioner's request was ultimately declined. Thereafter, the petitioner first filed a departmental appeal and then he approached the Service Tribunal for redress. His appeal has, however, been dismissed and hence the present petition, for leave to appeal.
4. Although, there was no controversy in regard to the fact that the petitioner's name had been placed higher on the merit list than the said respondents, but his appeal was mainly dismissed on the ground that the said respondents being nominees for the first batch, were to rank higher than the petitioner on account of their initial selection. Reference was made by the Tribunal to rule 17(a) of the North-West Frontier (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1989, which provides that "a person selected for appointment to post in an earlier selection shall rank senior to person selected in a later selection" .
5. Mr. Qazi Muhammad Anwar, learned counsel for the petitioner, has not been unable to show that the judgment of the Tribunal suffers from any infirmity. The Tribunal has acted in accordance with the rule laid down in rule 17(a) and the judgment of the Tribunal does not appear to be open to exception.
' In the result, leave to appeal is refused.
Cited by 2 cases
- ASHIQUE HUSSAIN YOUSIFANI vs THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF SINDH, PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, KARACHI and another 2002 PLC (C.S.) 77
- Engineer Nasir Zaman Khan vs Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 2024 PLJ Tr.C. (Services) 1