2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

K.B. ABID (MEMBER-II).

This appeal has been filed by Nasreen Akhtar Nursing Tutor, General Nursing School Joharabad with the plea that she may be granted pro forma promotion w.e.f. 2-10-1997, the date on which her junior/respondent No.2 Mrs. Saeeda Bano was promoted in BS-17 and seniority may be given accordingly.

2. Briefly stating, the appellant was appointed in BS-14 as Charge Nurse on 16-6-1981. Due to satisfactory performance, she was promoted as Head Nurse in BS-16 on 29-3-1993. The appellant being senior was not awarded BS-17 and the departmental representation was filed before the Appellate Authority for pro forma promotion. In this connection service appeal was also filed in Punjab Service Tribunal. After the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal in' Appeal No.2288 of 2000 dated 14-11-2001 he Head Department has granted the pro forma promotion to the appellant w.e.f. 28-6-2000 vide order No.SO(NC)5-2/03 dated 28-6-2004. The claim of the appellant remained unattended because she was entitled for promotion w.e.f. 2-10-1997: In this connection another representation was filed before the departmental authorities which was not decided within the mandatory period of 90 days, hence this service appeal before Punjab Service Tribunal.

3. The claim of the appellant is that she is senior to respondent No.2 because the date of appointment of the appellant is 16-6-1981 and the date of appointment of respondent No.2 is 6-6-1984. The appellant was promoted to BS-16 on 29-3-1993 whereas respondent No.2 was promoted in BS-16 on 16-10-1993. In view of these facts, the appellant is entitled for promotion in BS-17 from the date on which her next junior was promoted.

4. The appeal has strongly been opposed by the respondents and explained that in previous Appeal No.2288 of 2000, the directions were given by Punjab Service Tribunal to Secretary Health to consider the request of appellant on merit. Consequent to the decision of Punjab Service Tribunal, pro forma promotion was awarded to the appellant w.e.f. 28-6-2000. She was required to file representation against this pro forma promotion order within the period of 60 days before the Appellate Authority but she never had filed objection. The present appeal is not maintainable. In the previous appeal, the appellant had not claimed seniority/promotion from the date Mrs. Saeeda Bano was promoted. The copy of seniority list attached by the appellant with this service appeal is unreliable.

5. In Tribunal proceedings, the counsel for the appellant has furnished the seniority list of Deputy Nursing Superintendent/Nursing Instructors (BS-17) as stood on 22-11-2006. The seniority list has been notified by the department on 18-12-2006. As per this list, the name of respondent No.2 stands at Serial No.110 whereas the name of the appellant stands at Serial.No.162. In this list the date of appointment of. appellant has been shown as 16-6-1981 whereas the date of appointment of respondent No.2 shown as 1-6-1984 as charge Nurse. From this seniority it is clearly mentioned that the appellant was senior as Charge Nurse as compared with respondent No.2. Similarly the date of promotion of the appellant in BS-16 is 29-3-1993 whereas the date of promotion of respondent No.2 is 16-10-1993. Counsel for the appellant in this connection has submitted another copy of seniority list circulated vide letter No.SO(C-1)2-1/95(6), dated 23-7-1996. This notification indicates that the appellant was promoted in BS-16 on 29-3-1993. The department in Notification No;S.O.(NC)1-786/05, dated 18-12-2006 has wrongly mentioned the date of promotion in BS-16 of appellant as 8-5-2001. It needs to be rectified. The direction of Punjab Service Tribunal in Appeal No.2288 of 2000 dated 14-11-2001 is very much clear. The respondent No.1/Secretary Health was directed to grant the pro forma promotion to the appellant on merit. This means that the pro forma promotion was to be given on the basis of seniority-cum-fitness. The claim of the respondents that request of appellant is time-barred, is not maintainable because in the matter of promotion and pay, the question of limitation is not applied. In this connection reference is given to Punjab Service Tribunal judgment reported in 2002 PLC (C.S.) 1388.

6. On the basis of record, the case of appellant for promotion in BS-17 from the date of promotion of next her junior is proved. Directions are given to respondent/Secretary Health to consider the case of the appellant for promotion to BS-17 from the date her next junior was promoted in BS-17. The date of promotion of the appellant in BS-16 (29-3-1993) would be the deciding factor along with the well-established formula of seniority-cum-fitness at that relevant time. With these orders, the appeal is disposed of. H.B.T./30/PST???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Order accordingly.