2001 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

Raja Muhammad Asghar Khan for Appellant (in Appeal No.52-Q of 1997). Manzoor Ali Khan for Appellant (in Appeal No.2751(R) of 1997). Javaid Aziz Sindhu, Standing Counsel alongwith Mehmoob Alam, Section Officer, Establishment Division, D.R. for Respondents. Date of hearing: 6th November, 1998. MUHAMMAD AYUB KHAN (MEMBER).

Arguments have been heard and record perused.

2. We intend to dispose of both the aforesaid appeals by a single judgment as they are identical in legal and factual aspects. Both the appeals are well within time.

3. The appellants though senior as per the Seniority List yet the Departmental Promotion Committee concerned failed to consider their promotion within time whereas their junior incumbents were considered and promoted. Their cases were deferred meaning thereby that they were not superseded as is evident from the documents available on the file, inclusive of the parawise comments furnished by the respondents. Both the appellants were placed in Selection Grade (B-19) earlier that the respondents who were junior to them and according to the ruling of the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan contained in 1991 SCMR 696 grant of Selection Grade is a promotion. Otherwise the appellants admittedly are senior to the respondents. Sometimes due to administrative reasons it becomes not possible for the Selection Board to convene its meeting as required due to its multifarious activities. No doubt promotion of an incumbent is made prospectively and not with retrospective effect but where there is no fault on the part of an incumbent and the Administration fails to provide benefit of promotion to an incumbent by the due date, the incumbent gets right to his ante-dated promotion and in this respect the case-law has been developed by the Honourable Supreme Curt of Pakistan.

4. A perusal of the record further shows that both the officers belong to Police Service of Pakistan having been appointed through the Federal Public Service Commission on the basis of competitive examination and during the course service they were promoted to senior Police Service Scale in B.18 and thereafter in B.19 from time to time. In other words both the officers are of the Police Group. There is no dispute about their seniority in the record and similar is the case- of their confidential record consisting of CR/dossiers and as such in face of their positive service record we need not go into detailed discussion on the factual side of the appeals.

5. There are a large number of authorities regarding seniority, promotion and back benefits. Even after retirement when the needful was not done by the competent Authority in face of entitlement of the civil servant, such a civil servant can be given back benefits later on with retrospective effect, inclusive of the promotion and financial benefits, and in this respect the latest authority is contained in 1998 SCMR 736 and para. 9, Page 2237 in which the officer involved therein was allowed back benefits even after, retirement from service. The Service Law so developed by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan through numerous judgments hold the field and the benefits of any sort accrued thereunder cannot be denied to any civil servant found in similar situation. In the instant appeals both the appellants were senior and have goods service record but despite this the Administration failed to promote them at the proper stage without any valid reason and thus they both are entitled to the ante-dation of their promotion as prayed for.

5. Pursuant to the aforesaid discussion both the appeals are accepted and resultantly the promo-ions of the appellants are ante-dated with effect from the date their juniors were so promoted. They are also entitled to all the back benefits. However, we allow the parties to bear their own costs. H.B.T./565/Sr.(Trib)??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Appeals accepted.