1989 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

MALIK MUHAMMAD PARVEZ KHAN (CHAIRMAN).--Appellant preferred the present appeal against respondent's order for not granting the move-over to him from BPS-17 to BPS-18 with effect from 1-12-1984. According to him he is serving as Lecturer in Economics in the Education Department since 1-11-1973 and was entitled to the move-over to the next higher grade since 1-12-1984. His case was forwarded to the concerned quarter which was sent back on 31-3-1985 with the endorsement that he is not considered suitable for move-over. There was no ground given for unsuitability of the appellant to earn the move-over, therefore, he under the apprehension of adverse ACR for the year, 1983 approached the authority for the expunction of the same because he had got bad relations with the Reporting Officer which resulted in an enquiry against his Immediate Officer and the adverse remarks affecting the move-over were set aside in toto while his case was again submitted for the grant of move-over. However, the same was deferred with the remarks dated 4-4-1987 that he should earn one more report. After the writing of the ACR again his case was put before the concerned forum but to his entire dissatisfaction he received the order dated 9-3-1988 that he was not considered suitable due to his unsatisfactory record of service. According to him his case of move-over was thoroughly examined and deferred vide previous order and the impugned order was illegal, ultra vires, contrary to the earlier orders, hence not maintainable. His appeal to the authority was rejected on 21-8-1988; hence the present appeal. Respondents refuted the claim of the appellant on the grounds that this Court has of no jurisdiction, that the appeal is not competent and the same is bad for non-joinder of necessary party. It was further admitted that the remarks for the year 1983 were expunged and the entries were converted into average except in column 3 of Part II and columns 4 and 12 of Part III. The decision of the Selection Board is final and cannot be challenged. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that appellant had been serving in the Education Department from 1973 and after the introduction of the scheme of move-over, he became entitled to the benefits as he fulfilled the requisite qualifications. His adverse ACR was expunged and in the light of the order of the respondent Government he was entitled to the grant of move-over. On the other hand learned Special Government Pleader argued that findings of the Selection Board cannot be challenged before this forum and since the appellant did not qualify for the requisite qualifications for the grant of move his case was not considered for the same. We have gone through the record of the case with the assistance of the arties. Under the rules in vogue the Provincial Selection Board is empowered to grant the appellant move-over in the light of the record subject to the approval of the authority i.e. the Chief Minister. In the present case we have examined the record thoroughly but were unable to rind out the approval or rejection of the case of the appellant by the authority. What we were told at the Bar by the representative of the respondent was that the cases which are not approved by the provincial Selection Board are not sent to the authority for approval. This practice is not legal and proper because the authority i.e. the Chief Minister under the rules is to approve or reject the case of a Government servant. Such like Boards arc constituted only to facilitate the work of the authority, who being the Chief Executive of the Province is always busy in other governmental and Political activities relating to his job. However, this is a fact that this case was not sent to the authority and the recommendations of the Selection Board cannot be made the subject-matter of appeal before this Tribunal. This being the position, the appeal fails which is hereby dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs and the file be consigned to the record room. A.A./110/Sr.N Appeal dismissed.