2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

QAZI MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN (MEMBER).

All the above listed four appeals are based on identical facts, involving common question of law, we shall, therefore, dispose of these appeals by this single common judgment.

2. Briefly the leading to these appeal are that appellant Abdul Wahid an M.Sc. (Zoology), was selected through Federal Public Service as Plant Quarantine Inspector (BPS-16), Plant Protection Department Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock, Government of Pakistan, on 11-6-1983. Appellant Shuhabuddin Ahmed M.Sc. (Zoology) was selected through Federal Public Service Commission as Plant Quarantine Inspector (BPS-16), Plant Protection Department, Ministry of Food Agriculture and Livestock, Government of Pakistan, on 25-10-1981. Appellant Anwarul Haq M.Sc. (Botany) was selected through Federal Public Service Commission as Plant Quarantine Inspector (BPS-16), Plant Protection Department Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock, Government of Pakistan, on 14-9-1992. Appellant Muzaffar Iqbal Khan, M.Sc. (Zoology) was selected through Federal Public Service Commission as Assistant Entomologist (BPS-16), Plant Protection Department Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock, Government of Pakistan, on 21-1-1992. Messrs Shahid Abdullah, Muhammad Din Baz (late) and Muhammad Ashfaque, all having the degree of B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture were also selected/ appointed through Federal Public Service Commission on the same post of Plant Quarantine Inspector (BPS-16) on 1-10-1991, 7-12-1992 and 6-12-1993 respectively. These three junior persons and others, having B.Sc. (Hons) Agriculture Degree were, however, granted "BPS-17 Personal", vide notification dated 24-12-1999 of Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock, which is reproduced as under:-- "Notification No.F.246/91-PP: In pursuance of the decision taken by the Inter-Provincial Conference (IPC) in case No.IPC/13/1/80 dated 5-11-1980/Memo. No.IPC-1/M80, dated 17-11-1980 and concurrence of Finance Division vide their O.M. No.F.2(28)R.II/94-Dy.502, dated 9-12-1999, the competent authority has been pleased to grant BPS-17 as personal to the following officers (B-16) of the Plant protection Department possessing B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture Degree with immediate effect:-- S. No. Name and designation with BPS

2. Mr. Shahid Abdullah Plant Quarantine Inspector (B-16). 3 4 5 6 7

8. Mr. Muhammad Ashfaque, Plant Quarantine Inspector (B-16)

9. Mr. Din Baz, Plant Quarantine Inspector (B-16). 10 11 12 Later on, vide Addendum dated 20-3-2003 to the above mentioned notification, their BS-17 personal was antedated with effect from the date of their appointment.

3. Being aggrieved by the grant of BPS-17 Personal to their above mentioned 3 juniors, all the appellants preferred departmental appeals on or about 20-3-2002 to the Secretary, Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock, Islamabad, but they received no reply in spite of reminders dated 4-4-2003, 17-4-2003 and 2-5-2003; hence, they filed their respective appeals before the Tribunal on 18-7-2003, praying as under:-- "(a) declare that when BPS-17 personal have been given to junior Plant Quarantine Inspectors on the basis of B.Sc. Agriculture then appellant with M.Sc. (Zoology/Botany) being at par; is equally and legally entitled to the same BPS-17 personal to him w.e.f. date of his joining as BPS-16 Officer in Plan Protection Department; (b) make a direction to the respondents to notify the appellant's award of BPS-17 as personal to him by treating him equally and at par with B.Sc. Agriculture Degree-holder Junior Plant Quarantine Inspectors and Pay/Release difference of pay to appellant; (c) direct the respondents to perform their lawful duties as Public Functionaries according to law; (d) any other remedy/relief which the Honourable Tribunal on the facts and circumstances of the case deem fit, proper, appropriate, reasonable and judicious be awarded; (e) costs of appeal be granted to appellant."

4. Along with their respective memo. of appeal, the, appellants have filed application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.

5. In the written comments filed on behalf of the respondents it has been stated that the prescribed academic qualification/experience for the post of Quarantine Inspector (BPS-16) like the four appellants and their three juniors was; "B.Sc. (Agriculture with Specialized in' Entomology/Plant Pathology or M.Sc. (Zoology/Botany) with special paper in Plant Pathology/Entomology (not less than second class) candidates with some research experience preferred." But the difference between the four appellants and their three juniors was that the latter possessed the degree of B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture whereas the appellants were M.Sc. (Zoology/Botany) which was not considered equivalent to their B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture, hence the said three juniors of the appellants were granted NPS-17 (personal) on the basis of the decision of the Inter-Provincial Conference (IPC) dated 17-11-1980 with concurrence of Finance Division O.M. dated 9-12-1999. That the appellants were not considered for MPS-17 Personal because they did not possess the degree of B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture; even then the representation of the appellants had been forwarded to Administrative Ministry of Food and Agriculture Government of Pakistan for sympathetic consideration.

6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully.

7. The learned counsel for the appellants argued that the M.Sc. (Zoology/Botany) degree of the appellants and the B.Sc. (Hons. Agriculture) both were of the duration of six years 'Post Matriculation Course therefore, these degrees were equivalent to each other yet the respondents unnecessarily made distinction between two degrees: He argued that the respondents had discriminated against the appellants and has deprived the appellants of the recurring financial benefits, as such, the appellants filed departmental appeal but it was not responded by the concerned authorities as already mentioned above. He argued that the appellants were entitled to the benefit which their three juniors had been given by the department.

8. Reiterating the stand taken up by the respondents in their written comments, the learned counsel for the respondents contended that the question in the appeals was about the equivalence of the M.Sc. (Zoology/Botany) degree f the appellants with the B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture degree of the three juniors of the appellants, therefore, the matter was referred for the equivalence of the said degrees to the Higher Education Commission (HEC) and to the Registrars of the Universities of Agriculture Faisalabad and Tando Jam as also to the Universities of Karachi and Punjab: The HEC, the Sindh Agriculture University, Tando Jam, the University of the Punjab and University of Agriculture, Faisalabad informed the respondent-department that both the degrees i.e. B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture and M.Sc. (Zoology/Botany) were not equivalent to each other. However, the University of Karachi informed that in the absence of detailed syllabus it was not possible for it to determine the equivalence of the said degrees. The learned counsel for the respondents in view of such position urged that the appellants were not entitled to NPS/BPS-17 (Personal) like the three juniors of the appellants whom they had not impleaded as respondents in this appeal which was time-barred by many years.

9. We have carefully considered the above arguments of both sides.

10. The appellants have filed photostat copy of consolidated advertisement 113 Case No.F4-122/93.R(13/93) published in Daily Dawn of June 25, 1993 wherein the prescribed qualification/ experience for the post of Plant Quarantine Inspector (BPS-16) Department of Plant Protection Ministry of Food and Agriculture was mentioned as under: "113 Case No. F-122/93. R(13/93) Plant Quarantine Inspector Department of Plant Protection Ministry of Food and Agriculture, BPS-16. Temporary but like to continue for an indefinite period. Qualification/experience B.Sc. (Agriculture) with specialization in Entomology/Plant Pathology or M.Sc. (Botany/Zoology) with special paper in Plant Pathology/Entomology (not less than second class)." The above advertisement shows that simple B.Sc. Agriculture was considered equal to M.Sc. (Zoology/Botany) as mentioned above, where the three juniors in 'question of the appellants had obtained B.Sc. (Hons.) degree. This is neither denied not rebutted by the appellants. For NPS-17 (Personal) the respondent-department had given preference to B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture way back in 1980 on the basis of the decision of the Inter Provincial Conference held on 5th November, 1980 which is reproduced as under:

"(1) The ICP approved the following recommendations contained in paras.6 to 9 of the summary, dated 5th September, 1980, submitted by the Ministry of Finance; (a) Posts, whether under the Federal or Provincial Government for which the minimum prescribed qualification is M.Sc. (Agri.) or B.Sc. (Hons.) in Agriculture or DVM/B.Sc. (A.H.) obtained after less than six years of post-matric study, should be placed in NPS-16. Consistent with this principle, various posts in the attached departments of the Ministry of Food and Agriculture should be categorized under NPS-17 or NPS-18, as per Annexure "11" to the summary: (b) the present incumbents of all the posts of Agricultural Assistant/Veterinary Assistants possessing Agriculture/Vat. Degree in the Ministry of Food and Agriculture, its attached departments and autonoinouc, bodies, for which the minimum prescribed qualification is B.Sc. (Agril.) or B.Sc. (A.H.) should be allowed NPS-17 as personal to them. Similarly, the present incumbent of other posts possessing Agriculture/Vet. Degree in the Ministry of Food and Agriculture, its attached departments and autonomous bodies with equivalent designations and nomenclatures, for which the minimum prescribed qualification is B.Sc. (Agril.) or B.Sc. (A.H.) should be allowed NPS-17 as personal to them. This decision would be effective from 1st May, 1977, or the date of actual appointment, whichever is later, but no arrears will be allowed for the period 1st May, 1977 to 30th June, 1980; (c) the question relating to grant of NPS-17 to Social Welfare Officers should be decided by the respective Provincial Governments keeping in view their own peculiar conditions and circumstances; and (d) grant of NPS-14 to prosecuting Inspectors and NPS-11 to prosecuting agency is set up by the Provincial Governments. (11) The Ministry of Interior should, in consultation with the Law Division, the Provincial Government and other agencies concerned, submit a report to the President in four to six weeks on the proposal for the separation of the prosecuting agency from the police."

11. It was in pursuance of the above decision at the ICP that the three juniors of the appellants had been given NPS-17 (Personal). It appears that the main criterion was the degrees of M.Sc. Agriculture of B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture and BDM ASC (A.H.). The appellants did not have any of the above degrees. On the other hand their M.Sc. (Zoology/Botany) 'degrees was treated in the advertisement referred to above as equivalent to simple B.Sc. Agriculture. B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture was definitely superior to simple B.Sc. Agriculture which was shown as equivalent, to M.Sc. (Zoology/Botany) in the advertisement referred to above.

12. That the degree of M.Sc. (Zoology/Botany) is not equivalent to B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture is fully supported by the HEC and the Universities of Agriculture Tando Jam, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad as well as the University of the Punjab. Their opinion is reproduced as under:-- In its letter dated 17-4-2004 the Sindh Agriculture University Tando Jam stated as under:-- "I am directed to refer your letter No.2-61/2003-EI dated 9-4-2004 on the subject noted above and to inform that the contents of Higher Education Commission, Islamabad under letter No.8-35/HEC/A&D/2003/833, dated 4-07-2003 on the subject-matter are crystal clear that "because of the distinct disciplines the degrees B.Sc.(Hons.) Agril. In Entomology/Plant Pathology are M.Sc. Botany or Zoology not can be considered equivalent each other". This University is following the policy adopted and regularized by the Equivalence Committee of the defunct UGC now HEC Islamabad. It is further extended that duration of B.Sc. (Hons.) Agril. Entomology and Plant Pathology taught at this University and M.Sc. in Botany/Zoology at other Universities is same." University of the Punjab in its letter dated 23-4-2004 replied as udder: -- "B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture with specialization in Entomology/ Plant Pathology and M.Sc. Botany or Zoology involves 4 years of study after F. Sc. All these degrees are awarded in distinct disciplines and are not considered equivalent to each other. University of Agriculture, Faisalabad in its letter dated 17-5-2004 replied as under:-- "I am directed to refer to your letter No.2-61/2003-EI dated 9th April, 2004 on the subject cited above and to state than the degree of M.Sc. Zoology/Botany with specialization in Entomology/Plant Pathology cannot be considered equal to B.Sc. (Hons.) Agril. On the plea that in M.Sc. Zoology/Botany degree courses only 1-2 papers of Entomology/Plant Pathology are taught whereas in B.Sc. Hons.) Agril. Entomology/Plant Pathology students take four semesters/two years only courses of their respective specialization, which are about 100 credit hours in addition to minor course and major courses studied in first semesters/two years. So M.Sc. Zoology/Botany by no mean can be equivalent to B.Sc. (Hons.) Agril. in Entomology/Plant Pathology." Higher Education Commission in its letter dated July, 4, 2003 replied as under:-- "With reference to your letter No.2061/2003-El dated 27th May, 2003 on the subject, it is informed that B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture with specialization in Entomology/Plant Pathology and M.Sc. Botany or Zoology involves 4 years of study after F.Sc. All these degrees are awarded in distinct disciplines and are not considered equivalent to each other."

13. It may be pointed out here that the above mentioned decision of the IPC was not challenged by anyone. On the other hand the grant of NPS-17 (Personal) to the three juniors of the appellants was challenged by the appellants with a delay of about more than 3-1/2 years. No cogent reason for the delay had been mentioned in the application for condonation of delay and the juniors of the appellants who were granted NPS-17 had not been impleaded as parties.

14. The upshot of the discussion of the appeals is that the appellants had not been discriminated against by the respondents as against their juniors not impleaded in their appeals. The four appeals are devoid of any merit. These are dismissed accordingly with no order as to costs.

15. Copies of the judgment be sent to the parties under registered cover and to the relevant quarters under rule 21 of Service Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1974. H.B.T./1/FST Appeals dismissed.