2006 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

JUSTICE (RETD.) ABDUL GHANI SHAIKH (CHAIRMAN).

Through the instant appeal appellant is claiming retrospective promotion to BS-18 and BS-19 with effect from 30-4-1986 and 1-7-1992 respectively.

2. Succinctly appellant's case is that he was appointed as Junior Instructor B-14 (Electrical) on 27-9-1971, promoted as Lecturer (B-17) on 7-2-1975. His cadre at his own option was changed to Senior Instructor (B-17) on 27-5-1986 and was promoted to B-18 under four tiers formula on 1-7-1992, promoted to B-18 on regular basis on 12-5-1994 and promoted as Associate Professor (B-19) under four tiers formula on 18-12-2002. During service appellant passed B.Tech. (Honours) in the year, 1983. As it appears from the perusal of case file, this is for the fourth time that appellant has invoked the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Firstly, in the years, 1993 a final seniority list of officers of B-17 as stood on 1-1-1993 was issued wherein appellant's name was placed at serial No.3. He challenged the said seniority list in Appeal No.126/1993 which vide judgment dated 13-6-1994 was allowed by this Tribunal with direction that appellant be assigned seniority at serial No.1 by showing his date of regular appointment in B-17 as 7-2-1975. Again in 1992 some of his juniors were promoted to B-18 but appellant, as claimed by him, was ignored and he filed Appeal No.49/1992 which, however, was dismissed as withdrawn as the appellant wanted to challenge the Notification of promotion of his rivals before Honourable High Court of Sindh, Karachi. There is, however, nothing on the record to indicate if the appellant ever approached the Honourable High _Court. Once again in the year, 1998 his juniors, as claimed by him, were promoted but he was ignored. As such he filed Appeal No.295/1998, which by judgment dated 17-9-2002 was dismissed by this Tribunal. In the said judgment it was observed that as per appellant's version some posts in Electrical Technology were lying vacant and no suitable person holding degree in Engineering was available and appellant being B.Tech. (Hons) be considered dispassionately in accordance with the rules.

3. According to appellant, the private respondents Nos.5 to 10 who were juniors to him were promoted earlier but appellant was ignored without any reason. He was, however, subsequently promoted to B-18 under four tiers formula with effect from 1-7-1992 and to B-19 with immediate effect vide Notification dated 18-12-2002. He is claiming that his promotion to B-18 and B-19 may be made effective from the date his juniors were promoted.

4. Heard appellant in person, learned Asstt. A.-G. on behalf of official respondents Nos.1 to 3, Mr. Faiz Muhammad, Legal Advisor on behalf of respondent No.4 and Mr. Nasir Hussain, Advocate on behalf of private respondent No.5. With their able assistance also perused the case file and case-law referred to by them.

5. Admittedly, the method, qualification and other conditions for appointment to the posts of Technical Education are governed under the Recruitment Rules notified on 28-2-1984 and 12-7-1984, in pursuance of sub-rule (2) of the Rule 3 of the Sindh Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1974. According to Recruitment Rules of 1984, the vacant posts of Head of Department/Assistant Professor (B-18) are to be filled in the following manner. Head of Department Assistant/Professor/Industrial/Coordinator Workshop Superintendent (Men and Women section)/Deputy Director Pakistan Swedish Institute of Technology. (i) Not less than 20% by initial recruitment. (ii) Remaining by promotion from amongst the persons holding the post of Lecturer/Chief-Instructor, Pakistan Swedish Institute of Technology/Senior Instructor/Principal Vocational Institutes (B-17) of the relevant section possessing Degree in Engineering or equivalent qualification in the relevant subject with at least 5 years' service, as such or length of service as prescribed by Government from time to time. If no suitable person holding Degree in Engineering in the relevant subject in the relevant Section is available for promotion, then by promotion from amongst the Senior Instructor/Chief Instructor, Pakistan Swedish Institute of Technology/Principal Vocational Institute (B-17) in the relevant Section, possessing B-Tech. (Hons.) in the relevant subject with 5 years' service as such, or length of service as prescribed by Government from time to time. Bachelor's degree in Engineering in the relevant subject from recognized University or equivalent qualification from Recognized Institute, with at least 5 years' teaching/Professional experience in the subject. There is also no denial of the fact that appellant possesses degree of B.Tech. (Hons.) while all the private respondents possess degree in the Engineering. Therefore, as per recruitment Rules of 1984 ibid, only the holders of Bachelor's degree in Engineering on the relevant subject are entitled to be considered for promotion to the post of Head of Department/Assistant Professor. However, in case, no suitable person holding degree in Engineering in the relevant subject is available, then alone the person possessing B.Tech. (Hons.) in the relevant subject with 5 years' service can be considered for promotion to the post of the Head of Department/Assistant Professor. Although appellant stated that at the time when the holders of Bachelor's degree in Engineering were being promoted some other posts in the relevant subject i.e. Electrical were lying vacant and not other suitable person was available, yet he was ignored, but appellant in the earlier. Appeal No.295/1998 so also in the present appeal failed to substantiate his assertion. In the absence of any positive proof mere appellant's assertion that some other posts were lying vacant and no suitable person holding Bachelor's degree was available, has no value. Even otherwise, the appellant's cadre to Senior Instructor was changed on 27-5-1986. Therefore, at the time when the holders of Bachelors degree in Engineering were promoted appellant was short of 5 years' experience which is also one of the condition precedent for promotion to the post of B-18.

6. In these circumstances, appellant's claim for retrospective promotion to B-18 w.e.f. 30-4-1986 being not tenable is hereby declined. Likewise his claim of retrospective promotion to B-19 w.e.f. 1-7-1992 is also not tenable.

7. In the memo, of appeal and during the course of arguments, appellant attacked the promotion of many other officers of B-18 and B-19 without joining them as a party in the appeal. All those officers belong to other Technologies. Therefore, their promotions have no relevance with the promotion of incumbents of Electrical Technology.

8. For the aforesaid reasons, finding no merit in the appeal, the same is dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

9. Announced in open Court. H.B.T./49/SST???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Appeal dismissed.