2003 PLP 1080 (SCMR)

MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.

This appeal by leave of the Court is directed against judgment of Sindh Service Tribunal (hereinafter referred as the Tribunal) through which appeal filed by the appellant against order of departmental authority of cancellation of his recruitment/appointment as Electric Inspector B-18 has been dismissed. Appellant, who was working as Assistant Engineer in K.E.S.C. on transfer was appointed as Electric Inspector, a post in B-18 but in his own pay and grade of B-17. Subsequently, however, the post of Electric Inspector B-18 was advertised for direct recruitment. Appellant, alongwith 12 others applied for the said post. Advertisement appeared in the newspapers on 6-9-1994, the selection was made in haste on 12-9-1994 and notification issued for appointment of the appellant. In the relevant Rules prescribed qualification for Electric Inspector in B-18 was as follows:-- "Electric Inspector: Column No. 3 (B-18) (i) By initial recruitment; or (ii) By Promotion from Assistant Electrical Inspector possessing degree in Electrical Engineering or Mechanical and Electrical Engineering 5 years experience as such; or (iii) By transfer, on tenure basis from WAPDA or any Government Department of persons, possessing prescribed, qualifications for initial recruitment. (i) Only male holding Degree in Electrical Engineering having six years' experience as Electrical Engineer in a Government Department Autonomous Body or firm repute. (ii) Registration as Professional Engineer with Pakistan Engineering Council. The appellant is admittedly B.Sc. Electronic and not possessor of Electrical or Chemical Engineering degree.

2. Subsequently, the departmental authorities having, come to the conclusion that the appellant was not holding basic qualification for the recruitment against the said post, his order of appointment was cancelled through order, dated 25-1-1997, against which the appeal filed by the appellant before the Tribunal has been dismissed.

3. The Tribunal, however, held that the appellant being B.Sc. Electronic has been equated with the electrical engineering by Pakistan Engineering Council, therefore, so far as the ground of not possessing the prescribed qualification was not available but it held that on the date when advertisement for recruitment was made, the post had not been taken out of purview of Sindh Public Service Commission. Selection having, not been in a fair and transparent manner, therefore, the same could not be sustained though it was held that the ground on which the departmental authority cancelled the appointment of the appellant could not be maintained.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that once it was held that the ground on which the appointment of the appellant had been cancelled by the departmental authority through order impugned in the appeal before the Tribunal was riot maintainable, the appeal was liable to be accepted and the other grounds, on which departmental authority did not proceed could not have been made the ground for sustaining the said order.

5. We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and found that the departmental authority was right in passing order on the ground that the appellant did not fulfil the requisite prescribed educational qualification for the post and the learned, Members of the Tribunal appear to have not gone deep in the matter and examined the scope of Pakistan Engineering Council Act, 1975 which governs the matters as to registration of engineers for the purpose of practising the profession or Engineering., If one kind of degree was equated with other by the Council for purpose of registration, it would not in any manner alter the position so far as qualification prescribed for recruitment in the civil service, by the relevant rules.

6. The Recruitment Rules, as has been reproduced above, clearly prescribed that only Electrical Engineer or Mechanical and Electrical Engineer with five years experience was qualified to seek appointment against the said advertised post, therefore, the Tribunal was wrong in holding that the appellant wag possessing prescribed qualification. Educational qualification could either be relaxed by the competent authority though relaxation can be made in respect of other, procedural matters prescribed in the recruitment rules inclusive of requirement to refer the matter to FPSC.

7. We, therefore, uphold the decision of the departmental authority of cancellation of the recruitment of the petitioner as Electric Inspector in B-18 and hold that. the appeal before the Tribunal was liable to be dismissed on this short ground.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant lastly argued that the appointment after advertisement of the post of the appellant on regular basis as Electric Inspector in B-18 was not challenged by any person before the Tribunal therefore, the Tribunal could nut go into the question of legality or otherwise of the said order for under section 5 of the Sindh Service Tribunals Act, 1973 the Tribunal may, on appeal, confirm, set aside, vary or modify the order appealed against. Section 4 of the said Act also provides that appeal before the Tribunal shall lie against specific and express orders. Arguments, in our considered view is plainly unsound and has no force. Departmental authority had already passed an order of cancellation of recruitment appointment of the appellant as Electric Inspector which order was challenged before the Tribunal by the appellant, therefore, it was open to the Tribunal to go into the question of legality of the said original order in order to find out whether the appellant had any right to maintain the appeal.

9. For the foregoing reasons this appeal has no force, which is accordingly dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. S.A.K./A-394/S Appeal dismissed.