| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 2870 2021 SLD 2870 2021 PLC 1383 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petitions Nos. 1092 and 1093 of 2018, decided on 12thSeptember, 2018.*(Against the judgment dated 8.3.2018passed by Islamabad High Court, Islamabad in I.C.A. No. 859of 2013)Date of hearing: 12th September, 2018.
Present: Mushir Alam, Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and Munib Akhtar, JJ
Petitioner in person.Nemo for
Respondents.
Civil Petitions Nos. 1092 and 1093 of 2018, decided on 12thSeptember, 2018.*(Against the judgment dated 8.3.2018passed by Islamabad High Court, Islamabad in I.C.A. No. 859of 2013)Date of hearing: 12th September, 2018.
Present: Mushir Alam, Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and Munib Akhtar, JJ
Petitioner in person.Nemo for
Respondents.
KHUSHDIL KHAN MALIK
VS
SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION CABINET BLOCK, ISLAMABAD and others
Law: Occupational Groups and Services (Probation, Training and Seniority) Rules, 1990
Section: 2
Law: Civil Servants Act, 1973
Section: 3,9
(a) Occupational Groups and Services (Probation, Training and Seniority) Rules, 1990--- ----R. 2, Cl. (viii) ---Induction in Secretariat Group---Pre-requisites---Petitioner was inducted into service against the post of Headmaster (BPS-18) on 24.12.1996 in the Federal Government Educational Institutions (Cantts/Garrison)--- In the year 2004 he was transferred to the Federal Government on deputation basis and he was repatriated to the parent department vide an Office Memorandum dated 20.10.2010; he had hardly served in his parent department as member of the teaching staff when he was again transferred in the year 2011 to the Federal Secretariat on deputation---Petitioner was neither an officer of Management Group nor of Secretariat Group as provided in Cl. 3 of the Office Memorandum No.2/2/75-ARC dated 12-04-1976 [Manual on Appointment, Promotion and Transfer (Edition-2013), Appendix A, Page No. 280]---Moreover he didn't belong to any of the 'Occupational Groups' in terms of Cl. (viii) of R. 2 of the Occupational Groups and Services (Probation, Training and Seniority) Rules, 1990; therefore he could not be considered for appointment through horizontal movement---Moreover there was nothing on record to show that the petitioner was ever recommended by the controlling Ministry of the parent department to be considered for such appointment---Therefore the petitioner had no vested right to be considered for induction/absorption in the Secretariat Group as per prescribed eligibility criteria and conditions laid down in the relevant laws and policies, despite his best service record---Petitions for leave to appeal were dismissed. (b) Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973)--- ----Ss. 3 & 9---Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973, Pt. II--- Promotion on the basis of 'Time Scale Formula'---Scope--- Civil Servants Act, 1973 ('the 1973 Act') did not define the term 'Time Scale Promotion', therefore, it could not be considered as a term and condition of service---Promotion on the basis of Time Scale was not a regular promotion but a matter of policy granted to specific categories of professions by the relevant competent authority with the concurrence of…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492