2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Chaudhary MUKHTAR HUSSAIN Versus A.K. GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary, Muzaffarabad and 2 others
| Citation | 2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Azad J&K |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Saddique Farooqi, J |
| Parties | Chaudhary MUKHTAR HUSSAIN Versus A.K. GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary, Muzaffarabad and 2 others |
| Primary Law | Civil service |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil service as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Azad J&K bench comprising: Muhammad Saddique Farooqi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (Chaudhary MUKHTAR HUSSAIN Versus A.K. GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary, Muzaffarabad and 2 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Khawaja Muhammad Nasim for Respondents.
- 6. The counsel for respondents argued that the law as well as Notification do not apply to the present case. According to him, the legal position in Azad Kashmir is somewhat different from Pakistan. It is also contended that case law is also distinguishable from the face of the instant case.
Headnotes / Summary
Advance increments
Civil servant after qualifying prescribed qualification was appointed as Tehsildar
Civil servant during course of his service having qualified LL.B. (Hon.) applied to a Authority for grant of two increments on basis of said additional qualification, but his claim was repudiated on ground that he did not hold Master's Degree-- Validity
Civil servant after qualifying LL.B. (Hon.) was performing many duties in Department which required legal knowledge
Authority had also assigned to civil servant duties for looking after legal matters in Department
Civil servant had placed on record a notice of acknowledgement by Senior Member, Board of Revenue, on compilation of a look whereby laws relating to Revenue and Rehabilitation Department had been codified in one volume
Civil servant had also placed on record certain copies of judgments of superior Courts and also notification whereby LL.B. (Hon.) degree was equated with Master's Degree for purpose of grant of advance increments
Law brought on record by civil servant had justified grant of two increments in favour of civil servant
Civil servant who had made a valuable contribution by compilation of Revenue/Rehabilitation laws in form of a book, deserved encouragement-- High Court accepting Constitutional petition of civil servant directed Authority to allow him two advance increments on basis of the additional qualification. Muhammad Zareef Khan v. Government of N.-W.F.P. 1996 MLD 833 and 1997 PSC 1333 ref. Petitioner in person.
Judgment & Decree
3. All Heads of Attached Departments, Azad Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir Muzaffarabad. Sub:‑ Grant of Advance Increments to the Employees Drawing in BPS
16. Sir, I am directed to refer to the subject noted above and to state that in partial modification of this Department's Notification No. FD/R/9755‑9855/91, dated 22‑8‑1991, the President of Azad Jammu and Kashmir has been pleased to allow the advance increments to the employees of Azad Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir drawing Pay in BPS‑16 for possessing or acquiring higher educational qualifications over and above the minimum qualification prescribed in the relevant rules for recruitment to the post held by them to the extent given below:‑‑ (i) Where the prescribed Matric F.A./F.Sc. B.A./B.Sc. M.A./M.Sc. qualification is Matric. Nil 2 4 6 (ii) Where the prescribed Nil Nil 2 4 qualification is F.A./F.Sc. (iii) Where the prescribed Nil Nil. Nil 2 qualification is B.A./B.Sc.
2. These increments will be allowed in accordance with the existing policy requiring fulfillment of the following conditions:‑‑ (i) The higher qualification is in the relevant field. (ii) The incumbent of the post (B‑16) has not availed the benefit earlier, on any lower post/scale. (iii) The qualification acquired is higher than the one prescribed in respect of the posts for direct recruitment under the service rules.
3. This order will take effect from 1‑7‑1996. Yours obedient servant. (Sd.) Iftikhar Naveed Deputy Secretary Finance (Regulation) Ph. No. 0581‑2837.
8. The contents of the aforementioned Notification prima facie show that only those persons will be entitled to the grant of two advance increments who possess M.A or M.Sc. degrees where the minimum qualification prescribed for the post is B.A/B.Sc. but practically other Masters Degrees have been also treated as equal to M.A/M.Sc. for this purpose. The letter issued by U.G.C. on 6‑4‑1988 shows that LL.B. (Hon.) degree has been equatted with Masters degree for employment as a lecturer. The first letter shows that degree of LL.B (Hon.) by the U.G.C. is equatted with LL.B. degree of other Universities. It does not show that such degrees were equatted with Master Degrees. However, the letter dated 1‑10‑1988 shows that LL.B. (Hon.) degree was equatted with Masters Degree for the purpose of employment to the post of Superintendents (B‑16) and the University granted two advance increments in favour of one Ali Akhtar Makhtoom. The Azad Jammu and Kashmir University granted four increments to Waqar Hussain Assistant (Audit) for possessing B.A and LL.B degrees. The Punjab University as per page 415 of its statutes allowed two increments in favour of the incumbents holding M.A./LL.B/M‑Com/M.Ed. qualifications. The Supreme Court of Pakistan also allowed two advance increments to its Private Secretaries for possessing the qualification of LL.B which was treated as over and above the prescribed qualification for the posts held by the incumbents. The judgment of Peshawar High Court titled "Muhammad Zareef Khan v. Government of N.‑W.F.P. and others (1996 MLD 833) and the judgment of the learned Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case titled "Government of N.‑W.F.P. v. Muhammad Zareef Khan and others" (1997 PSC 1333) support the view that LL.B (Hon) degree is equal to the Masters Degree for the purpose of grant of two advance increments.
9. As against this, no case law or precedent has been cited by the learned counsel for the respondents. I am of this view that the case law as well as the aforementioned Notification justify the grant of two advance increments in favour of the petitioner. Even otherwise I know that the petitioner has made a valuable contribution by compilation of Revenue/Rehabilitation laws in the form of a book published by the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Board of Revenue. The petitioner, thus, deserves encouragement, I also feel that the qualification in law is relevant for the duties assigned to a Tehsildar especially when he is functioning in the field as well as during performance of the duties in the Board of Revenue. When a police inspector has been awarded five advance increments in Pakistan on the basis of this qualification then there is no legal justification to refuse the grant of two advance increments to a Tehsildar.
10. An objection as to the jurisdiction of this Court was also raised. It is not shown by the learned Counsel for the respondents that any order was passed by the respondents on any application/request of the petitioner made in this behalf before the departmental authority. In the case when no order is passed, invoking "of writ jurisdiction of this Court is the only adequate remedy available to the petitioner. The Service Tribunal cannot be issued a direction for passing an order on the application/claim of a civil servant. It is, therefore, held that the High Court has got the powers to issue the direction for enforcing such a claim in this case.
11. As upshot of the above discussion, the petition is allowed and a direction is issued to the effect that the petitioner may .be allowed two B advance increments on the basis of his LL.B. (Hons.) qualification. H.B.T./172/AJK. Petition allowed.