| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2022 SLG 1760 2022 SLD 1760 2022 PLJ 253 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.A. No. 465 of 2021, decided on 28.9.2021. (Against the judgment dated 13.09.2018 passed by Peshawar Court, Peshawar in W.P. 2370-P/2018)
GULZAR AHMED, H.C.J., MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL AND MUHAMMAD ALI MAZHAR, JJ.
Mr. Naeem Jan, ASC for Appellant. Mr. Shumail Aziz, Addl. A.G. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Mr. Abdul Samad, Dy. Dire. ES Education Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Mr. Shakirullah Khan, SO (Lit) Finance, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for
Respondents.
C.A. No. 465 of 2021, decided on 28.9.2021. (Against the judgment dated 13.09.2018 passed by Peshawar Court, Peshawar in W.P. 2370-P/2018)
GULZAR AHMED, H.C.J., MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL AND MUHAMMAD ALI MAZHAR, JJ.
Mr. Naeem Jan, ASC for Appellant. Mr. Shumail Aziz, Addl. A.G. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Mr. Abdul Samad, Dy. Dire. ES Education Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Mr. Shakirullah Khan, SO (Lit) Finance, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for
Respondents.
FIDA MUHAMMAD---Appellant
VS
GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA through Secretary of Education, Peshawar and others
Law:
Section:
Civil Service-- ----Up-gradation and promotion--Difference of--Benefit of Notification issued for up-gradation from BPS 16 to BPS 17 was not accommodated to appellant while other employees at per were given same benefit keeping in view their length of service--Competent Authority pursuant to decision of a meeting held under Chairmanship of Secretary Establishment, allowed up-gradation to Primary School Teacher--Some clarification in earlier Notification that benefit of up-gradation to all CT-BPS-9 to BPS-15 and SETs-BPS-16 to BPS-17 shall be for one time only--Up-gradation cannot be claimed as a matter of right but it is in fact based on a policy decision of competent authority for its implementation across board for particular categories of employees jot down in scheme/ notification who fulfilled required qualification which is normally a particular length of service in a particular pay scale--Expression “up-gradation” in distinct from promotion which is not defined either in Civil Servants Act or Rules framed thereunder--In case of appellant at least ten years of service was required in BPS-16 for up-gradation in BPS-17 from 1.10.2007 and since his length of service was not commensurate to stipulated conditions hence he was not considered for up-gradation. [Pp. 235, 236 , 237] A, B, C, D, E, F 2016 SCMR 859; 2017 SCMR 890 ref. JUDGMENT Muhammad Ali Mazhar, J.--This civil appeal is directed against the judgment passed by learned Peshawar High Court in W.P. No. 2370-P/2018 whereby the writ petition was dismissed. 2. The short-lived facts of the case are as under: The appellant was appointed as CT in (BPS-09) on 15.09.1987. He was promoted to the post of SET/SST (BPS-16) on 24.07.2003. He reached to the age of superannuation on 04.05.2016 after qualifying 29 years of service and his pension was calculated on the basis of his last pay in BPS-16. The appellant lodged his grievance that he was not accorded the benefit of Notification dated 26.01.2008 issued by Government of KPK whereby up-gradation was allowed to SET/SST (BPS-16 to BPS-17) on completing ten years of service. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant argued that the benefit 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