Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUMTAZ ALI KHAN VS Respondent: GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN
1998 P L C (C
1998 P L C (C.S.) 1037
[Supreme Court of Pakistan]
Present: Saleem Akhtar and Fazal Karim, JJ
Prof. MUMTAZ ALI KHAN
versus
GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Establishment Division, Islamabad and 2 others
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 643 of 1995,'decided on 11th March, 1996.
(On appeal from the judgment dated 30-8-1995 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad passed in Appeal No. 250(R) of 1995).
Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973)---
----S. 9---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)---Promotion- Entitlement---Civil servant having failed to come up to qualifying score, post in question went to respondent, his junior---Validity---Civil servant contended that he belonged to specialist cadre, therefore, instructions contained in Parts II & III of guidelines for Departmental Promotion Committee were wrongly applied to him---Said contention was repelled by Service Tribunal---Civil servant had called Supreme Court's attention to Part IV of those guidelines to point out that such part itself had excluded application of Parts II & III to civil servants who were in specialist cadres such as doctors, teachers, research scientists and incumbents of purely technical posts for promotion within their own line of specialism ---Leave to appeal to Supreme Court was granted to consider contentions raised by civil servant.
M. Kowkab Iqbal, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 11th March, 1996.
ORDER
FAZAL KARIM, J.---The petitioner is an Associate Professor in BPS-19. According to him he was the senior most Associate Professor when a post in B-20 fell vacant. He was considered but "failed to come up to the qualifying score" and the post went to Mr.Sajjad Akbar respondent, who was admittedly junior to the petitioner. One of the contentions raised before the Tribunal was that the petitioner belongs to the specialist cadres and the instructions contained in Parts II and III of, the guidelines for Departmental Promotion Committee/Central Selection Board were wrongly applied to him. That contention was repelled by the Tribunal with the observation that the petitioner had "failed to explain that as Principal of the Federal Government Colleges, Cantt. Board how he fell within the cadre of "specialists" to claim exemption of Parts II and III .. . Learned counsel for the petitioner has called our attention to Part IV of those guidelines to point out that part itself excludes the application of Parts II and III "to civil servants who are in specialist cadres such as doctors, teachers and professors, research scientists and incumbents of purely technical posts for promotion within their own line' of specialism".
2. Leave to appeal is granted inter alia to consider this contention.
A.A./M-142/S Leave granted.