1998 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

MUHAMMAD BASHIR JEHANGIRI, J.

This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment dated 8-10-1996 of the N.-W.F.P. Service Tribunal whereby Appeal No.29 of 1996 filed by respondent No. l against promotion to the post of respondent No.2 as Tehsildar was accepted and the petitioners were directed to consider the former along with other senior most candidates for promotion to the post of Tehsildar.

2. As the time of promotion as Tehsildar, of respondent No.2 had put in 3 years' service as Superintendent in the Deputy Commissioner's Office. Despite being senior to respondent No.2 respondent No. l was ignored because he was working as Superintendent in the Commissioner's Officer and had not served as Superintendent for a period of 3 years in the Office of the Deputy Commissioner. Feeling aggrieved, respondent No. l filed appeal before the Service Tribunal. The plea of respondent No. l before the Tribunal was that before his promotion as Superintendent in the Commissioner's Office he had served for more than 3 years as Superintendent in the offices of Deputy Commissioner and Political Agent, therefore, under the amended West Pakistan Revenue Department Ministerial Service (Divisional Cadre) Rules, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as Revenue Department Service Rules), he was eligible for promotion as Tehsildar. On the contrary, the petitioners' stance before the Tribunal was that the case of the two respondents was governed by the West Pakistan Tehsildari and Naib-Tehsildari Service Rules, 1962 (hereinafter called as the Tehsildari Service Rules), wherein Superintendents working in Deputy Commissioner's Office with three years were alone eligible and that the West Pakistan Revenue Department Service Rules could not be possibly invoked. .

3. The amendment made in the Revenue Department Service Rules is as under:-- In Rule-2, (i) The following shall be added as sub-rule (ee):-- "(ee) 'Deputy Commissioner' means the Deputy Commissioner of a District and includes the Political Agent incharge of a Political Agency, and (ii) for sub-rule (f), the following shall be substituted:- "(f) 'District' means a Revenue District and included a Political Agency. "

4. The Tribunal held the view that the contention that since respondent No. l has not worked in Deputy Commissioner's Office for the prescribed period of 3 years and was, therefore, not considered was not a legally sound interpretation of two sets of the Rules. With reference to Centrally Administered Tribal Areas (Employees Status) Order, 1972, the Tribunal construed the word "employees" used therein as "employees serving in connection with the affairs of the Centrally Administered Tribal Areas within or outside those areas included members. of the Civil Service of N.W.F.P. and all other Government servants not belonging to any Central or Provincial Service". On this reasoning the Tribunal reached the conclusion that Deputy Commissioner includes the Political Agent and the word "District" means the Revenue District and include a Political Agency which would mean that working in the Office of P.A. or D.C. for 3 years would be sufficient and the Superintendent who had worked in the Office of Political Agent for more than 3 years would be equally eligible to be considered for promotion to the post of Tehsildar. It was, therefore, held that under the amendment by way of additions made in the Revenue Department Ministerial Service Rules respondent No. l would be eligible for promotion to the post of Tehsildar in the same manner as a Superintendent of D.C.'s Office is eligible subject to the fulfilling of the requisite minimum qualification, namely, 3 years' service as Superintendent either in D.C's Office or in the Political Agent's Office or jointly in both of them. The Tribunal took notice of the seniority list of the Superintendents in BPS-16 working in the Deputy Commissioner's Office as it stood on 31-12-1994 which did not include the name of respondent No.1 as according to the petitioners, he was not eligible to which the Tribunal took exception and while partially accepting the appeal, the; case was remanded to the petitioners to consider respondent No.1 for promotion to the post of Tehsildar alongwith respondent No.2 who according to respondent No.1, was junior to him. It was directed that tire name of respondent No. l alongwith other senior most eligible candidates should be put before the Departmental Promotion Committee who would make recommendations to the competent authority for promotion to the post of Tehsildar.

5. Mr. Talat Qayyum Qureshi, learned Additional Advocate-General, N.-W.F.P, has reiterated before us the contention that in the absence of any amendment in the Tehsildari Service Rules respondent No. l had not acquired any right to be considered for promotion as Tehsildar because he had not served for 3 years in the Office of Deputy Commissioner and hence not entitled to promotion as Tehsildar.

6. Mr. Atiqur Rehman Qazi, learned ASC, appearing for respondent No. l had supported the impugned order and maintained that the requisite amendment could only be possibly made in the Revenue Department Service Rules because the elaboration of the term 'Deputy Commissioner' to include the Political Agent and District to include the Political Agency were rightly made by the addition of clause (ee) after clause (e) in section 2 of the Revenue Department Service Rules.

7. In the Treatise "The Interpretation of Statutes" by N.S. Bindra, Fourth Edition, the principle of construction of the rules have been reproduced from the case law. At page-568 the following two guiding principles have been enunciated:-- "The two rules of construction--benevolent and strict--only represent different modes of approach, and their application depends on the nature of the rule or by bye-law in question and the nature of the attack made against it." In the construction of rules, concept of reasonableness and benevolence are two hallmarks. If this guidance is made applicable to the two sets of rules to the case in hand, the interpretation made by the Service Tribunal seems to be quite in accord with the settled principle of interpretation of the statutes. Since the term 'District' has been defined in clause (f) of section 2 of the Revenue Department Ministerial Service Rules, therefore, it was quite appropriate that the definition of 'Deputy Commissioner' should have been provided and expanded to include a Political Agent. Similarly, clause (f) defining District was expanded to include a Political Agency. We are, therefore, of the considered view that there is nothing wrong with the amendments made in the Revenue Department Ministerial Service Rules as aforesaid and the Tribunal has rightly construed that the amendment not incorporated in Tehsildari Rules would not be of any legal consequence.

8. In the light of what has been observed above, we find that reasons that weighed with the Tribunal in coming to the conclusion that the amendments made in the Revenue Departmental Ministerial Service Rules rightly come to the rescue of respondent No. l and that the departmental view that the said amendments having not been made in the Tehsildari Service Rules would not benefit respondent No. l is not sustainable.

9. By upholding the finding of the Tribunal and finding no infirmity of the kind, in the impugned order, warranting our interference, the petition is accordingly dismissed. A.A./N-14/S Leave refused.