1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

AJMAL MIAN, C.J.

This is an appeal with the leave of this Court against the judgment dated 21-3-1993 passed by the Federal Service Tribunal. Islamabad (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in Appeal No. 116(L) of 1989 filed by the appellant claiming regular pay scale (NPS-16) during the period when he was posted as Foreman (Instrument) at Steam Power Station, WAPDA, Faisalabad, dismissing the same. The brief facts are that at the relevant time the appellant was working as Test Inspector in the above Steam Power Station. He was posted as Foreman (Instrument) in his own scale of pay of (Test Inspector) against a vacant post through office order dated 1-9-1981 subject to the condition that he would be promoted and regular pay scale of Foreman (NPS-16) would be allowed to him on his successful completion of six months training at WAPDA Training Centre. It appears that the appellant was ready to take the above training but WAPDA could not provide the same for the reason referred to in the Resident Engineer's letter dated 23-9-1982 addressed to the Chief Engineer (at page 40 of the paper book). The appellant through his application dated 1-2-1982 requested for grant of regular pay scale (NPS-16) of the post of foreman but his request was turned down on the ground that he had not completed the above training. Thereupon, he filed above Service Appeal which was dismissed by the impugned judgment. After that the appellant filed petition for leave to appeal, which was granted to consider the question as to whether the appellant was entitled to receive higher salary during the period when he worked on the higher post in view of the judgment of this Court in the case of Federation of Pakistan v. Shahzada Shahpur Jan and 2 others (1986 SCMR 991), keeping in view the fact that the requisite training could not be obtained by the appellant for the reasons attributable to the respondents. In support of the above appeal Hafiz Tariq Nasim, learned counsel for the appellant, has vehemently contended that since the appellant had worked and had discharged full duties and responsibilities of the higher post, he was entitled to the salary of the same. Reliance has been placed by him on the case of Federation of Pakistan v. Shahzada Shahpur Jan and 2 others (1986 SCMR 991) (supra) wherein it has been held that an officer appointed to a higher post is called upon to discharge full duties and responsibilities of the higher post and, therefore, he will be entitled to draw presumptive pay inclusive of increments. The above principle bas been followed in some of the subsequent judgments of this Court Mr. Anwar H. Mir. learned counsel for the respondents is unable to controvert the fact that factually the appellant had worked on a higher post, namely, Foreman (Instrument) at Steam Power Station, WAPDA. He is also unable to controvert that in view of the above judgment of this Court, the appellant was entitled to higher salary for the period during which he discharged the duties and function of the above post. Learned counsel for the respondents is also unable to point out if it was on account of any default on the part of the appellant that he could not receive the requisite training. In this view of the matter, we allow this appeal and direct the respondents to pay the difference of salary for the period during which the appellant was posted as Foreman (Instrument) at Steam Power Station, WAPDA, Faisalabad. A.A./A-99/S Appeal accepted.