Employee was promoted on current charge basis and was confirmed thereafter

Citation Name : 2018 PLC(CS)N 12 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR
Side Appellant : MUSA JAN
Side Opponent : ARBAB SHAHEEN
Promotion---seniority , fixation of---Scope---Employee was promoted on current charge basis and was confirmed thereafter---Appeal of employees was accepted with the direction to enter the name of employee in the seniority list in the light of his temporary appointment---Validity---Employee was appointed on current charge basis against one of the posts reserved for initial recruitment---Said appointment was made on officiating basis---Employee was promoted on regular basis on the recommendations of respective selection committee---seniority could be claimed by a civil servant in a grade from the date of regular promotion---Anti-dated seniority could not be given to a civil servant on the basis of an order of appointment which was temporary in nature and did not confer any right except pay protection---seniority of contesting employees was issued in pursuance of law laid down by the Supreme Court---Service Tribunal was not competent to direct the authority to enter the name of employee in the seniority list in the light of his temporary appointment and could not violate and bypass the pronouncements of the Supreme Court---Impugned judgment passed by the Service Tribunal was recalled and appeal was dismissed---Authority had rightly issued the seniority list of contesting civil servants---Appeal was allowed in circumstances.

Citation Name : 2018 SCMR 1995 SUPREME-COURT
Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD RASHID BHATTI
Side Opponent : The DIRECTOR GENERAL FIA, HEADQUARTERS, ISLAMABAD
R. 3(c)---Fundamental Rules, Pt. II, R. 17(1), proviso---Inter-se seniority ---Grant for seniority in case of supersession and subsequent promotion---Petitioner, who was working as sub-inspector in BPS-14 in the Federal Investigation Agency, was superseded by several sub-Inspectors of BPS-14 on two separate occasions---Such supersession was not challenged by the petitioner at that time---Subsequently the petitioner was promoted as Inspector (BPS-16) and on assumption of such promoted office, he made representation to the department for inter-se seniority as Inspector (BPS-16)---Service Tribunal declined request of petitioner for inter-se seniority by observing that he was considered twice for promotion by the Department Promotion Committee, but superseded on each occasion by the Committee on account of many factors; that such supersession was approved by the Department Promotion Committee in its successive meetings and resultantly the petitioner could not regain his inter se seniority ---Plea of petitioner that proviso to R. 17(1) of Fundamental Rules made express provision for granting of seniority in case of supersession and subsequent promotion---Validity---Proviso to R. 17(1) provided for a situation where the civil servant who was entitled to be promoted from a particular date but for no fault of his own was wrongfully prevented from rendering services in the higher post was to be paid the arrears of pay and allowances of such higher post through proforma promotion or upgradation by ante-dated fixation of seniority ---Present case, however, was neither of a tenure post nor a deferment case nor that of petitioner being not promoted from a particular date for no fault of his own---Petitioner was deliberately superseded and such supersession was also endorsed by the Departmental Promotion Committee---Rule 17(1) of Fundamental Rules as relied upon by the petitioner therefore, was not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and leave was refused accordingly.

Citation Name : 2018 SCMR 1411 SUPREME-COURT
Side Appellant : KHAN MUHAMMAD
Side Opponent : CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN QUETTA
S. 10---Posting and transfer of civil servant---Junior officer elevated and placed above his seniors through a notification---Section 10 of the Balochistan Civil Servants Act, 1974 did not state that a civil servant could be posted or transferred by disregarding his seniority , nor did it empower the Government to cut short the normal tenure of a posted/transferred civil servant, and particularly without assigning any reason---By way of impugned notification a junior officer was elevated and placed above his seniors without assigning any reasons---Supreme Court set aside the impugned notification in circumstances.