PLC(CS) 2020

2020 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

HAMID SHAKEEL SABIR and others Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN, through Secretary, Establishment Division and others

Jurisdiction / Court
Balochistan High Court
Decided Date
Constitutional Petitions Nos.671 and 672 of 2017, decided on 17th October, 2019.
Honorable Judges
Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Abdullah Baloch, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2020 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Forum / Court Balochistan High Court
Bench Members Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Abdullah Baloch, JJ
Parties HAMID SHAKEEL SABIR and others Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN, through Secretary, Establishment Division and others
Primary Law Civil service
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2020 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?

This judgment primarily cites: Civil service as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2020 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?

The case was heard and decided by the Balochistan High Court bench comprising: Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Abdullah Baloch, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2020 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (HAMID SHAKEEL SABIR and others Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN, through Secretary, Establishment Division and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Civil service

Representation

  • Muhammad Riaz Ahmed, Khalid Sultan and Raza Khan for Petitioners.

Headnotes / Summary

"Police Service of Pakistan" and "Provincial Police Service"

Promotion

Criteria

Petitioners were appointed in Provincial Police Service and subsequently they were inducted in Police Service of Pakistan cadre

Departmental Selection Committee started process for promotion of Officers Police Service of Pakistan to BPS-19 but petitioners were not considered on the ground that they did not possess requisite length of service for promotion

Validity

According to Sl.No. 157 of Estacode, if initial appointment of an officer was made in BPS-18 and he served for a period of seven years then he would be eligible for promotion to the post of BPS-19

Officers who had served for a period of twelve years in BPS-17 and above would be eligible for promotion to BPS-19

Petitioners were appointed in BPS-17, whereafter they were promoted to BPS-18 and subsequently were inducted and encadred as Officer of Police Service of Pakistan

Encadrement in Police Service of Pakistan could not be considered as "initial appointment"

Petitioners had more than twelve years of service in BPS-17 and more than three years of service in BPS-18 and they possessed the requisite qualification and were eligible to be considered for promotion in BPS-19

Departmental Selection Committee was directed to consider the cases of petitioners for promotion in accordance with law and on merits

Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly. Muhammad Zafar Ali v. Asim Gulzar 2015 SCMR 379 distinguished. Ghulam Mustafa Buzdar, D.A.G.

Judgment & Decree

JAMAL KHAN MANDOKHAIL, CJ.

The above titled petitions having identical points involved in them, as such, we intended to dispose of them through this common judgment.

2. Facts of the case are that there are two categories of Police Service in Pakistan, one is the Police Service of Pakistan (PSP) and the other is the Provincial Police. It is important to mention here that 40% of the seats of grade 18 in PSP cadre are allocated for promotion from amongst the officers of Provincial Police Service, which is being distributed according to their respective share. The petitioners in both the petitions were appointed as Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) in Provincial Police Balochistan and were subsequently promoted to grade B-18 as Superintendent of Police. Basing upon this formula, the petitioners in both the petitions after their promotion to grade 18, were subsequently inducted in the PSP cadre through different notifications.

3. The Departmental Selection Board (DSB) started process for promotion of PSP officers to B-19, but the petitioners were not considered for promotion on the pretext that they do not possess the requisite length of service for promotion to the post of B-19. Felling aggrieved, these petitions have been filed.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners stated that according to Serial No.157 of the Estacode, an officer who possesses 12 years experience in B-17 and above, is eligible to be considered for promotion to B-19. They added that since all the petitioners possess the required length of service, therefore, they are eligible to be considered for promotion to grade B-19, but the official respondents are not considering them, which is an illegality.

5. The learned D.A.G opposed the contentious and stated that after encadrement in PSP, the seniority of the petitioners was to be considered as per Rule 11(2) (c) of the PSP Rules, 1985 read with section 8(4) of the Civil Servant Act, 1973. According to him, for the purpose of promotion of Provincial Police officers from B-18 to B-19, their experience would be considered from the date, when they were encadred in PSP. The learned DAG added that for promotion to B-19, seven years service in B-18 is must, which the petitioners do not possess, as such, are not eligible to be promoted. He stated that the petitioners are not entitled to get benefit of their past service in B-17, therefore, their claim is baseless. The learned DAG relied upon a judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Muhammad Zafar Ali v. Asim Gulzar 2015 SCMR 379.

6. Arguments heard and perused the record. The matter pertains to the determination of eligibility of PSP officers of B-18 for their promotion to B-19. One of the condition for promotion is length of service of an officer, which has been described in Serial No. 157 of the Estacode, which is reproduced hereunder: "Sl. No. 157 Minimum Length of Service for Eligibility for Promotion to Posts in Various Grades In pursuance of rule 8-A of the Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973 and in supersession of the instructions laid down in the Establishment Division's O.M. No.1/9/80 R.II(A), dated the 12th January, 1981, (Annex), the President is pleased to decide that the minimum length of service for promotion to various grades shall be as follows:- -For Grade @ 18 5 years in Grade@ 17 -For Grade @ 19 12 years in Grade@ 17 and above -For Grade @ 20 17 years in Grade@ 17 and above -For Grade @ 21 22 years in Grade@ 17 and above Provided that:-- (i) Where initial appointment of a person not being a person in government service, takes place in a post in BPS 18, 19 or 20, the length of service specified in this Office Memorandum shall be reduced by the following periods; First appointment in Reduced by Grade- 18 5 years Grade-19 12 years Grade-20 17 years (ii) Where initial appointment of a person already in government service takes place, on recommendations of the Federal Public Service Commission, in a post in BPS 18, 19 or 20, the length of service specified in this Office Memorandum shall be reduced by the periods specified in proviso (i); (iii) Where first appointment of a person other than a person covered by proviso (ii) was made to government service in BPS 16 or below, one-half of the service in BPS 16 and one fourth in BPS 15 and below may be counted as service in BPS 17 for computing length of service for the purpose of promotion only. [Authority:- Estt. Division's O.M. No.1/9/80-R.2 dated 2-6-1983].

7. According to S.No.157 of the Estacode and the Government Revised Promotion Policy, if initial appointment of an officer is made in Grade-18 and served for a period of seven years, he is then eligible for promotion to the post of B-19. On the other hand, those officers who served for a period of Twelve (12) years in B-17 and above, becomes eligible for promotion to B-19. The petitioners were appointed in B-17, whereafter, they were promoted to B-18 and subsequently, were inducted and encadred as the PSP officers. Under such circumstances, their encadrement in PSP cannot be considered as initial appointment. Basing on such principle, all the petitioners have more than 12 years service in B-17 and for more than three years service in B-18 as well, as such, they possess the requisite qualification, hence, were eligible to be considered for promotion to B-19.

8. The respondents Nos. 1 and 4 have misunderstood the relevant provision of law by considering the encadrement of the petitioners in PSP as initial recruitment. Thus, calculating the length of services of the petitioners from the date of their encadrement in PSP is an illegality. As far as the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan relied upon by the learned DAG is concerned, that relates to the determination of seniority amongst the officers. Since there is no issue of seniority before us, therefore, the judgment relied upon by the learned DAG is not relevant in the cases in hand. Thus, in view of the above, both the petitions are allowed. It is declared that the petitioners possess the requisite length of service of 12 years in B-17 and above, necessary for the purpose of considering them for promotion to B-19. The Departmental Selection Board should reconsider their cases for promotion as well, whereafter, the proceedings be completed strictly in accordance with law and on its own merits. ZC/167/Bal. Petitions allowed.