1988 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

Arguments heard and the record perused. Annexure `A' appended with the appeal dated 10-10-1987 is a letter by the Director of Technology Education Department, N.-W.F.P., Peshawar vide which appellant alongwith three others was refused the move-over to Grade-19. Annexure `C' is representation dated 2-11-1987, Annexure `D' is reply by the Provincial Government dated 26-12-1987 and Annexure `E', notification dated 19 2-1986 vide which one Mr. Gul Ahmad, Head of Department (Related Studies), Government College of Technology, Peshawar was allowed move-over from Grade-18 to Grade-19 with effect from 1-12-1984. Annexure `A' appended with written statement is the appoint letter dated 3-1-1974 in favour of the appellant. Annexure `B' is the letter of appointment issued after the appellant qualified the examination conducted by the Public Service Commission. Annexure `C' dated Peshawar, the March 17, 1986 contains the terms and conditions regarding the move-over. Annexure `E' dated Peshawar, the 24th March, 1985 deals with the counting of the ad hoc appointment towards minimum experience prescribed for a post. Annexure `G', dated 1st January, 1986 provides the guidelines for recommending the cases of move-over and so is the Annexure `I' dated Peshawar, the 3rd October, 1985. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the embargo of 12 years regular service for the grant of move-over to Grade-19 was not the intention of the Provincial Government. It is a sort of financial assistance to an employee of the Government to meet his day to day expenses during this hard period when otherwise no vacancy is in existence for his regular promotion to the higher grade. Appellant fulfils the conditions anal is entitled for the grant of Grade-19 as a move-over. On the other hand learned Special Government Pleader assisted by Mr. Atta Muhammad, Section Officer, representing the Provincial Government argued that Government has prescribed the length of service for the grant of move-over from Grade-18 to Grade-20 and its prerequisite is the regular service vide Exh.`G' apart from other conditions. The following was the length of service for a case of move-over. B-18 5 years B-19 12 years B-20 17 years We have given our anxious thought to the arguments and have perused the record. It is an admitted fact that move-over cannot be reckoned towards promotion/seniority in any case. It is a sort of financial aid to a Government servant, who otherwise fulfils all the qualifications for promotion to a higher grade but for want of vacancy, he cannot be promoted. Government was alive to this situation and introduced this scheme m the year, 1981 as a measure to remove the fiscal problems faced by a Government employee. Condition No. 8 given in Annexure `B' appended with the appeal would show that "an employee should be a regular member of the service, cadre or holder of a post concerned and should have completed five years of service for move-over to BPS-18, 12 years of service for move-over to BPS-19 and 17 years of service for move-over to BPS-20 in BPS-17 and above. Service rendered in pay scales below BPS-17 will be computed according to the existing formula". If the intention of the Government was the regular service, then it must have added the same before the words' `service' in clause (8) of the scheme. Rules are to be construed in favour of' the subject/the employees. These are not meant to harm their interest in any way. The result is that we accept the appeal as prayed for by the appellant and set aside the impugned orders vide which the appellant was refused to move-over to Grade-19, from 1-12-1986. Parties are left to bear their own costs and file be consigned to the record room. A.A./101/Sr. N Appeal accepted.