Mst. RIAZ ANJUM, HEADMISTRESS and another vs Mrs. S. MAQBOOL and others
This matter arises from six petitions directed against a common judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, which had set aside impugned transfer and posting orders and issued directions to the Education Department not to transfer members of the General Cadre to vacancies in the Nationalised Cadre, while ordering postings according to seniority pursuant to a Governor's order dated 23-6-1977. The core legal question pertained to the validity of transferring civil servants between equivalent posts and whether a civil servant has a vested right to claim a particular post. The Supreme Court disposed of the petitions in light of its earlier precedent in Abdur Rashid Qayyum v. Government of Punjab, holding that while appointment from an equivalent grade constitutes a transfer rather than promotion, no civil servant can claim a right to any particular post, though the Government may consider them for appointment if found suitable. The key principle laid down is that civil servants have no vested right to claim posting to any specific post, notwithstanding equivalency of pay grades.
- Can a civil servant claim a right to be posted to any particular post on the basis of holding an equivalent grade?
- Does the transfer of a civil servant from one equivalent post to another amount to promotion?
ORDER
AJMAL MIAN, C.J.---By this common order we intend to dispose of above six petitions which are directed against common judgment dated 2-2-1984 passed by Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, in Cases Nos.230/310, 452/396/470/395 and 530/389 of 1983 filed by the private respondents disposing of the same in the following terms:-- "12. In view of the detailed discussions made by us of the entire situation of this case, we are of the confirmed view that the impugned orders are liable to be set aside and we are under legal obligation give directions to the respondents/Education Department, not to transfer any further member of the General Cadre and post them against the vacancies so available in the Nationalised Cadre, so that the aforesaid-Nationalized Rules are not violated..
13. The result is we accept the appeals, set aside the impugned orders and direct that the appellants as well as other Members of the category should be posted as Headmaster/Headmistress in accordance with their seniority in pursuance of the Governor's order dated 23-6-1977, which is still in the field. There will be no orders as to costs. Judgment be communicated to the parties."
2. Two above petitions have been filed by private persons whereas other four petitions have been filed by the Provincial Government of Punjab.
3. Raja Muhammad Anwar, Senior Advocate Supreme Court, appeared in C.Ps. 355 and 356 of 1984 for the petitioners and Sh. Altaf Elahi, Additional Advocate-General, Punjab, appeared for the Government of Punjab. They invited our attention to an unreported judgment dated 27-2-1994 passed by this Court in Civil Appeals Nos. 396 to 400 of 1993 (Abdur Rashid Qayyum and others v.
Government of Punjab and others), wherein a considered view has been taken as under:-- "As stated earlier, the posts of headmasters and headmistresses are in Grade-17. It is contended on behalf of the appellants that as they were in the same grade as was enjoyed by the headmasters and headmistresses they were entitled to be appointed to the said posts and if they were so appointed it would not be a case of the promotion but one of transfer from one equivalent post to another. This seems to be correct but then as already stated no civil servant can lay a claim to any particular post. It will, however, be open to the Government to consider the appellants for appointment as headmasters or headmistress or equivalent posts if it finds them suitable for the same."
4. Raja Muhammad Anwar, Senior Advocate Supreme Court, appearing in above two petitions submitted that in view of the above unreported judgment of this Court, the observations contained in the above quoted portion of the Tribunal's judgment are no longer effective and thus, the above petitions are disposed of in the terms of above judgment of this Court.