| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 4699 2025 SLD 4699 = 2025 PLC 634 |
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petition No.D-6200 of 2022, decided on 18th December, 2023.
Before Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar and Sana Akram Minhas, JJ
Muhammad Arshad Khan Tanoli for Petitioner. Ali Safdar Depar, Assistant Advocate General for
Respondents.
Constitutional Petition No.D-6200 of 2022, decided on 18th December, 2023.
Before Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar and Sana Akram Minhas, JJ
Muhammad Arshad Khan Tanoli for Petitioner. Ali Safdar Depar, Assistant Advocate General for
Respondents.
ZAKIR HUSSAIN SAMO
VERSUS
The PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary and others
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Law: Sindh Civil Servants Act, (XIV of 1973)
Section: 4(b),9(1)
(a) Civil service-------Promotion---Pro forma promotion, Entitlement, Government servant filed constitutional petition (on 14.10.2022), eight (08) days before his date of retirement---Contention of the petitioner was that the post in Grade-19 was sanctioned in the Budget for the year 2022-2023, whereas, time and again requests were made to consider his case for promotion but no response was given, hence, in the alternative, petitioner was entitled for a pro forma promotion---Version of the respondents was that delay in conducting a meeting of the Promotion Committee had occurred due to non-finalization of promotion rules for the newly created post--Validity---If a person is not considered due to any administrative slip-up, error or delay when the right to be considered for promotion is matured and without such consideration, he reaches the age of superannuation before the promotion, then obviously the avenue or pathway of pro forma promotion comes into field for his rescue---If he lost his promotion on account of any administrative oversight or delay in the meeting of DPC or Selection Board despite having fitness, eligibility and seniority, then in all fairness, he has a legitimate expectation for proforma promotion with consequential benefits---If due to any non-vigilance and insensitivity of a department, promotion of employees who are on the verge of retirement has been delayed, then the employees are not to suffer, entitling them to claim proforma promotion---Undisputedly, the petitioner was at Serial No.1 of the last seniority list issued by the respondents / Department whereas, it was also not in dispute that a post of Additional Director (BS-19) had been created and sanctioned, however, it was asserted by the respondents that the same (post) was not yet operationalized; but, for this the petitioner could not be blamed---Regarding the version of the respondents (that delay in not conducting a meeting of the Promotion Committee due to non-finalization of promotion Rules for the newly created post), was again not the fault of the petitioner---Therefore, in the given facts, the petitioner appeared to have been subjected to…