1995 PLP 1053 (SCMR)

‑‑‑‑Art. 212(3)‑‑‑Promotion‑‑‑Entitlement to specified post‑‑‑Such post was to be filled in 100 per cent. by promotion from amongst Directors of Establishment and failing that, either by initial appointment or by transfer‑‑ ‑ Civil servant who was serving in the department was entitled to be promoted to specified post but he was not considered and an outsider was brought in for the post‑‑‑Service Tribunal while accepting civil servant's appeal directed that his case be considered for promotion on merit‑cum‑seniority basis and that he was eligible for promotion under the rules‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Post in question in first instance was to be filled by promotion‑‑‑Resort to other methods of recruitment, viz. direct' recruitment and , induction of an outsider by transfer could only be made if no officer in the department was eligible and qualified for promotion‑‑‑Authority had not denied that civil servant was eligible for promotion‑‑‑Authority had no option to induct any officer from outside by means of transfer without first considering civil servant for promotion to the post in question which admittedly was not done‑‑‑Judgment of Service Tribunal directing Authority to place case of civil servant before appropriate Selection Board for consideration for promotion was not open to any exception‑‑‑Such matter, even otherwise, did not involve any substantial question of law of public importance warranting grant of leave to appeal‑‑‑Leave to appeal was refused in circumstances. M. Nawaz Abbasi, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners. Shah Abdur Rashid, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent. Date of hearing: 2nd November, 1994. ZIA MEHMOOD MIRZA, J.‑‑‑This is a petition for leave to appeal filed by the Federation of Pakistan and two other functionaries against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad dated 27‑3‑1994 allowing the appeal of the respondent Abdul Rashid with the direction that "the department shall forward the case of the appellant to appropriate authority Central Selection Board within next two months for consideration for promotion as Director‑General (BPS‑20) on ‑merits‑cum‑seniority, whb is otherwise eligible for promoting as Director‑General (BPS‑20) under the rules".

2. Facts necessary for the disposal of this petition, briefly stated, are that the respondent Abdul Rashid was initially appointed as Statistical Investigator in the Federal Bureau of Statistics on 1‑1‑1960. In due course of time he rose to the rank of Director, Data Processing in (BPS‑19) on 27‑2‑1974 and was later transferred to and posted as Director in the Directorate‑General of Registration on 1‑3‑1977, where he reached the maximum of BPS‑20 by move over.

3. According to the Recruitment Rules issued vide Ministry of Interior Notification dated 2‑4‑1989 the post of Director‑General (BPS‑20) in the Directorate‑General of Registration was to be filled in 100% by promotion from amongst the Directors (B‑19) and failing that either by initial appointment or by transfer. It appears that wi0out considering the case of the respondent for promotion to the post of Director‑General, an officer from Police Service of Pakistan was brought in and appointed as Director‑General. Feeling aggrieved, the respondent after exhausting the departmental remedy preferred an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal claiming that he was eligible for promotion to the post of Director‑General as he possessed the requisite qualification and experience prescribed for the post but the appointing authority without even considering him for promotion appointed an officer from outside as Director‑General. The precise prayer of the respondent was that he "may be considered for promotion to the post of Director‑General, Registration (BPS‑20) as per provisions contained in the notification dated 2‑4‑1989 which embodies the terms and conditions of service. In case he is approved for such promotion by the Selection Board and the competent Authority, then the officer holding the post of Director‑General, Registration may be withdrawn and repatriated to Police Service of Pakistan". The Service Tribunal accepting the contention of the respondent allowed his appeal with the directions aforementioned vide judgment dated 27‑3‑1984.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and have also perused the impugned judgment of the Service Tribunal and the Notification, dated 2nd April, 1989 laying down the method of appointment to various posts in the Directorate‑General of Registration including the post of Director General. According to this Notification, the post of Director‑General (BPS‑20) was to be filled by promotion and failing promotion, the post "shall be filled in by initial appointment and failing that by transfer". The Notification quite clearly lays down that the post of Director‑General in the first instance is to be filled by promotion and resort to other methods of recruitment namely the direct appointment and induction of an outsider by transfer can only be made if no officer in the department is eligible and qualified for promotion. It is not the case of petitioner that the respondent was not eligible for promotion to the post of Director‑General. That being so, was not open to the Government to induct any officer from outside by means of transfer without first considering the respondent for promotion to the post in question which admittedly was not done.

5. In the circumstances, the impugned judgment of the Service Tribunal directing the Department concerned to place the case of the respondent before the appropriate authority Selection Board for reconsideration for promotion is not open to any exception. Even otherwise, the case does not involve any substantial question of law of public importance warranting grant of, leave‑to appeal. This petition is, therefore, dismissed. A.A./F‑342/S Leave refused