Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD ASHRAF VS Respondent: FINANCE DIVISION, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD
1998 P L C (C
1998 P L C (C.S.) 921
[Supreme Court of Pakistan]
Present: Ajmal Mian and Fazal Ilahi Khan, JJ
Dr. MUHAMMAD ASHRAF
versus
FINANCE DIVISION, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 374 of 1995, decided on 8th November, 1995.
(On appeal from the judgment dated 21-5-1995 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, passed in Appeal No. 83-R of 1995).
Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973)---
----S. 17---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)---Civil servant Entitlement to advance increments---Civil servant in his earlier assignment was allowed four advance increments for having degree in M. Phil. and two advance increments on basis of his past experience---Civil servant, thereafter; joined Education Department wherein he was allowed four increments for his M. Phil. degree but benefit of two advance increments for past experience was denied to him---Validity---Civil servant could not point out any rule or instruction under which he could claim two advance increments as a matter of right on account of his past experience---In absence of any rule or instruction, it was within discretion of respondent Authority to allow such advance increments to him ---Factum that civil servant had applied through proper channel for subsequent post had no nexus with the question whether civil servant was entitled to have two advance increments on account of his 13past experience---Civil servant's fresh employment in different establishment would entitle him to claim salary and other benefits which were attached to such post---Leave to appeal was refused in circumstances.
Petitioner in person.
Nemo for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 8th November, 1995.
ORDER
AJMAL MIAN, J.---This is a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment dated 21-5-1995 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal, passed in Appeal No. 83(R) of 1995 filed by the petitioner against the refusal of the respondent to grant two advance increments on account of his past experience and performance. dismissing the same.
2. The brief facts are that the petitioner joined as Scientific Officer (BPS-17) in the Pakistan Agricultural Research Council, hereinafter referred to as the P.A.R.C. He was allowed four advance increments for having degree in M. Phil. and two advance increments on the basis of his past experience. The petitioner, in response to an advertisement of the Ministry of Education for some posts of Lecturers, successfully applied for the above post and joined as a Lecturer in F.G. College, H-9, Islamabad, with effect from 20-7-1989. His salary was fixed without allowing him the benefit of above six advance increments. However, upon his representation, four advance increments were granted to the petitioner on account of having degree in M. Phil. His request for allowing two' advance increments on account of his past experience was turned down by the department, by the appellant authority as well as by the Tribunal through the impugned judgment. The petitioner has, therefore filed the present petition for leave to appeal.
3. In support of the above petition, the petitioner who has appeared in person, has vehemently contended that since he had applied for the above post of Lecturer through proper channel, he was entitled to the same emoluments which he was drawing in P.A.R.C. However, he has not been able to point out any statutory rule or instruction of the Education Department under which he can claim two advance increments as a matter of right on account of his past experience. In the absence of any such rule or instruction, it was within the discretion of the respondent not to have allowed the same to him. The factum that the petitioner had applied through proper channel for the above post of Lecturer has no nexus with the question, whether the petitioner was entitled to have two advance increments on account of his past experience. This was a fresh employment in a different establishment i.e. the-education Department in place of P.A.R.C. and this was not a transfer from one department to another. In this view of the matter, the petitioner was entitled to claim salary and other benefits which were attached to the above post of Lecturer. He has not even pointed out that in the notice published for the above post, any promise was made by the department to give him two advance increments 'on account of his past experience. The petition has no merits. Leave is refused.
A.A./M-131/S???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Leave refused.