Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD SALEEM-II, STENOGRAPHER, ESTABLISHMENT, ISLAMABAD VS Respondent: FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN
1998 S C M R 746
1998 S C M R 746
[Supreme Court of Pakistan]
Present: Ajmal Mian, Actg. C.J., Mamoon Kazi and Ch. Muhammad Arif, JJ
MUHAMMAD SALEEM-II, STENOGRAPHER, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, ISLAMABAD---Petitioner versus
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Establishment Division, Islamabad and others---Respondents
Civil Petition No. 342 of 1996, decided on 12th December, 1997.
(On appeal from the judgment dated 9-4-1996 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad in Appeal No.497(R) of 1995).
Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973)---
----S. 9---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)---Promotion---Civil servant seeking his promotion in BS-17 and also seeking repatriation of respondent to his parent Department---Civil servant on question of promotion conceded that his name appeared on seniority list at Serial No. 12 out of which 6 vacancies had been filled in on basis of seniority---Civil servant could expect his promotion when five persons on waiting list who were senior to him had been promoted---Civil servant could not have' grievance when no one junior to him had been promoted and when there were still 5 persons above him in seniority list---Civil servant had no locus standi to seek repatriation of respondent who was on deputation from his parent Department to another Department---Order of Service Tribunal in dismissing civil servant's appeal whereby he had sought his promotion and respondent's repatriation had been rightly dismissed---Leave to appeal to Supreme Court was refused in circumstances.
Petitioner in person.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 12th December, 1997.
JUDGMENT
AJMAL MIAN, ACTG. C.J.---This is a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment dated 9-4-1996 of the learned Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad in Appeal No. 497(R) of 1995 filed by the petitioner for the following relief:
(a) "That respondent No. l be directed to promote/consider the name of the appellant for the post of Private Secretary (BS-17) with effect from the date on which respondent No.6 was illegally/unlawfully taken as Private Secretary i.e. with effect from 12-12-1993 and 25-4-1993.
(b) That respondent No.1 be directed to repatriate respondent No.6 to his parent Department i.e. Statistics Division."
The above appeal has been dismissed by the Tribunal for the following reason:
"Now coming to the merits of the case, the entire arguments of the appellant were on the appointment of Mr. Khalil Chaudhry as Private Secretary in the Establishment Division. He, however, could not produce any documents whereby it could be shown that Mr. Khalil Chaudhry had ever been appointed in the Establishment Division as Private Secretary. On the other hand, the Establishment Division have made a categorical statement in the comments that Mr. Khalil Chaudhry is working in the Establishment Division as Section Officer on deputation from the Statistics Division and that he was never appointed as Private Secretary. We were further informed that the post of Private Secretary to the Secretary, Establishment Division is still lying vacant and will be filled in accordance with the recruitment rules when considered necessary. The contention of the appellant that the post of Private Secretary had been occupied by Mr. Khalil Chaudhry in violation of the recruitment rules is, therefore, baseless. Besides, admittedly the appellant is the junior most Stenographer and cannot claim promotion to the post of Private Secretary as of right. The appeal has no merits and is liable to be dismissed. "
The petitioner being aggrieved by the above order has filed the present petition for leave to appeal.
In support of the above petition, the petitioner has vehemently contended that the continuation of respondent No.5 Khalil Ahmed Chaudhry, on deputation as a Section Officer against the post of Private Secretary has adversely affected the petitioner's prospects of promotion as Private Secretary. However, he has candidly conceded that there were 6 vacancies of Police Station in the respondent-department which were filled in on the basis of seniority i.e. the incumbent who were at Serial Nos.1 to 6 of the Seniority List. He has further conceded that his name appears on the Seniority list at Serial No. 12. In other words, before the petitioner can expect his promotion there are 5 persons on waiting list who are senior to him. We are unable to understand as to how the p, petitioner can have grievance when no one junior to him has been promoted as Private Secretary and when there are still 5 persons above him in the Seniority List. The continuation of respondent No.5 as a Section Officer on deputation against the post of Private Secretary, in our view, does not give any cause of action to the petitioner. The view found favour with the Tribunal seems to be correct.
Leave to appeal is, therefore, refused and this petition stands dismissed.
A.A./M-79/S Leave refused.