2001 (PLP)

Divisional-wise the appellant is at position No. 1 in Provincial Buildings Division No.IV in Karachi and no one till to date challenge his seniority position. That the Government of Sindh in the Finance Department was pleased to allow/grant Selection Grade at the rate of 33 % of the posts of the Naib-Qasids and Daftries in all the Departments under the Provincial Government. w.e.f. 1st June, 1991 vide Gazetted Notification, dated 26-9-1991. That the appellant being eligible and being a senior most in Division IV Karachi and having Seniority No.9 in combined Seniority List moved application for award of Selection Grade benefit. The application of the appellant was forwarded to respondent No.l by respondents Nos. 2 and 3 and the same was allowed by respondents Nos. l and 2, that Respondent No.3 being appointing authority of appellant and authorised officer under rules was pleased to allow Selection Grade BPS.2 to the appellant with approval of Competent Authority vide order, dated 29-11-1993 w.e.f 1-6-1991 as allowed by Finance Department and such entry was allowed by respondent No.3 in the Service Book of the appellant and pay of the appellant was fixed accordingly. The respondent No.3 forwarded the Service Book of appellant to Accountant-General Sindh Karachi who was pleased to verify the pay of appellant as recommended by respondent No.3. That appellant has drawn salary of Selection Grade BPS.2 w.e.f. 1-6-199.1 and Annual Increments of BPS.2 from 1-12-1991 alongwith difference of pay till 30-11-1996 for long 5 (five) years but no petition was moved/filed by any, of the respondents till then the appellant has been working diligently with no complaint of any sort. That on 30-11-1996 the appellant reached on maximum pay scale as BPS.2 as such he was allowed move-over in pay scale of BPS.3 w.e.f. 1-12-1996 by respondent No.2 vide order, dated 8-12-1996. That the respondent No.3 was pleased to endorse move-over Pay Scale BPS-3 in the Service Book of the appellant and forwarded the same to Accountant-General Sindh Office who were pleased to refix BPS.3 pay in favour of appellant w.e.f 1-12-1996. That the appellant is presently drawing BPS.3 pay scale and have drawn three Annual Increments of said pay scale without any objections from any of the respondents. That the surprise and shock of the appellant respondent No.3 without any show-cause notice, personal hearing or knowledge issued impugned order, dated 16-9-1998 in this regard in flagrant violations of mandatory, statutory and obligatory provisions of Sindh Civil Servants Act, 1973 and Rules framed thereunder. That on one side respondent No.3 has inflicted double punishment on the appellant on the other side the respondent No.2 has allowed same Selection Grade to junior Naib-Qasid vide order, dated 30-9-1998. That the respondent No.3 according to the impugned order has withdrawn his Selection Grade benefits from appellant under reference to respondent No.2 letter, dated 10-9-1998 but appellant is not aware of the contents of said letter as all has been done in back of the appellant and secretly. We have heard Mr. Abdul Latif Ansari, Advocate for the appellant and Mr. S.M. Sayedian Zaidi, A.A.-G. for official-respondents. According to the Advocate for appellant the impugned order, dated l6-9-1998 is void, illegal and has no bearing in the eyes of law as the same order is withdrawn by the same authority i.e. respondent No.3. He has further argued that no show-cause notice was issued nor personal hearing was afforded to the appellant. According to him appellant has availed benefit for 5 years as such locus poenitentiae is attracted In support of above contention he has relied on 1996 PLC (C.S.) P.72, PLC (C.S.) 1999, P.568, PLC (C.S.) 1999 P.457. He has also argued that the first order was passed by respondent No.3 as such the order cannot be withdrawn by the same grade officer which has happened in this case. He, has also argued that the appellant has filed departmental appeal which has not been decided by the Department and is still pending. Mr. Zaidi, A.A.-G. for respondents concedes and has submitted that admittedly no show-cause notice has been given to the appellant before withdrawing the order. He has also conceded on the' point that the same officer cannot withdraw the order as it is in this case. He has also conceded that no personal hearing was afforded to the appellant before withdrawing the order. We have heard the arguments and have also perused the citations. Admittedly the appellant has availed the benefit for about 5 years. We also feel with pain that the appellant has been condemned unheard and no show-cause notice was issued before withdrawal of the order or any personal hearing was afforded. We have no option but to allow this appeal as such we set aside the impugned order cited above with no order as to costs. H.B.T./9/K(Sr. Trib) Appeal allowed.