2007 PLP 81 (PLC)

JUSTICE (RETD.) TANVIR AHMED KHAN (CHAIRMAN).

Petitioners have filed this petition making grievance that in spite of the fact that they have been working as Sanitary Supervisors since long but till date they have not been regularized. A further grievance has been made that the respondent functionaries have not paid them the salary of the Sanitary Supervisors against which they have been working. In support of his contention learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon an earlier judgment in Case No.7(46)/03-L, decided on 18-10-2004 by this very Bench in an identical matter. Learned counsel for the respondents who appeared at late hours in the Court has controverted the stance taken by the petitioners. He has stated that the substantive post of the petitioners is Sanitary Worker and they had only been allowed to work temporarily as Sanitary Supervisor in their own pay and scale. He has further stated that the petitioners do not satisfy the basic qualification as per service rules for the post of Sanitary Supervisor, which is a matriculation. He however, has stated that a circular had already been issued to all the staff that those having the qualification of matric could provide the documents to the administration branch for their promotion to the post of Sanitary Supervisor in accordance with the law/Rules. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has stated that he would be satisfied if the petitioners are considered for the posts of Sanitary Supervisors if they satisfy the basic qualification for the same. He, however, has reiterated that the petitioners cannot be denied the extra amount, which they have become entitled to receive under the rules for the work done by them against the posts of Sanitary Supervisors. I have considered the contentions and have gone through the documents appended with this petition. It is reflected from the perusal thereof and has also not been denied by the learned counsel appearing for petitioners that they were substantively holding the posts of Sanitary Worker when the respondent authority asked them to work against the posts of Sanitary Supervisors for some time. Accordingly the petitioners have worked as Sanitary Supervisors for considerable period, which is a post of higher responsibility. The Honourable Supreme Court in a case reported in Islamic Republic of Pakistan through Secretary, Finance Division, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad v. Qazi Abdul Karim, Deputy Accountant-General, N.-W.F.P. Peshawar and another 1983 SCMR 883 allowed such benefit. The observations are as under: "We are of the view that in this conclusion, the learned Service Tribunal seems to be right. After all if an employee is promoted to officiate in a higher post involving higher responsibility, he must be held to be entitled to the minimum pay of the grade of the said higher office. In this respect reference may be made with advantage to a judgment of this Court in the case of the Postmaster-General Eastern Circle (E.P.) Dacca and another v. Muhammad Hasham PLD 1978 SC 61 in which a similar question had fallen for consideration. In that case also the respondent, an employee in Class-II post, was promoted by the Postmaster-General to officiate in Class-I post but in his appointment order it was clearly mentioned that he would continue to draw the pay of his substantive office. Notwithstanding this rider, however, this Court, after taking into consideration the effect of rules 30 and 35 of the Fundamental Rules, recorded the conclusion that so long as the services of the respondent were utilized in the higher post, he would be entitled to draw the minimum pay admissible in that post." In these circumstances the petitioners cannot be denied the extra amount, which they have become entitled to receive for their work, which they have rendered against the post of Sanitary Supervisor. As far as the prayer of the petitioners for their promotion to the post of Sanitary Supervisor is concerned, the same cannot be claimed as of right. In case the petitioners satisfy the basic qualification and requirements of law and rules for the post of Sanitary Supervisor in that eventuality the respondent functionaries would be required to consider their cases in accordance with law. Resultantly this petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondents to pay the petitioners extra amount taking into consideration the period during which they worked against the post of Sanitary Supervisor. Disposed of in the above terms. H.B.T./145/NIRC Order accordingl