1995SCMR762

[Supreme Court of Pakistan]

Present: Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry and Saleem Akhtar, JJ
MUHAMMAD ILYAS MALIK---Petitioner
versus
MINISTRY OF INTERIOR, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary,
Islamabad and another---Respondents
Civil Petition No. 768-L of 1993, decided on 11th May, 1994.
( On appeal from the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad passed in Appeal No.
6(L) of 1984).
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)---
----Art. 212(3)---Civil servant ---Upgradation and fixation of seniority---Civil servant was
initially removed from service but was reinstated by Service Tribunal---Intervening period
between removal and re-instatement was treated as leave of the kind due to civil servant---Civil
servant was Opt considered for upgradation, as he was at that time out of service while officials
of his department were allowed benefit of upgradation from specified date---Civil servant's
representation was not accepted and his appeal before Service Tribunal did not bear fruit---Leave
to appeal was granted to consider the contention that order of removal from service having been
set aside, civil servant was deemed to be in service and as such he was entitled to benefit of
upgradation of post from specified date.
Ch. Mushtaq Masood, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Masood Akhtar, Advocate-on-Record
for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 11th May, 1994.
ORDER
SALEEM AKHTAR, J.---The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the
Federal Service Tribunal whereby his appeal was dismissed.
2. The petitioner while working as a Registration Inspector/Registrar, Industrial Registration
Office, Vehari, was removed from service by order dated 16-2-1982. This order was set aside by
the Tribunal and the petitioner was reinstated by order dated 3-4-1989, but it was left open to the
respondents to initiate fresh disciplinary proceedings and to determine as to how the intervening
period could be treated. Fresh proceedings were accordingly taken and the petitioner was found
guilty of inefficiency. He was censured by order dated 17-9-1789 and the intervening period
from 16-2-1982 to 17-4-1989 was treated as leave of the kind due to him.
3. By Notification dated 22-5-1986 issued by the Establishment Division, Registration
Inspectors/Registrars and Statistical Investigators (BPS-16) were upgraded to BPS-17 and 132
officials were allowed benefit of upgradation to BPS-17 by notification dated 29-5-1986. The
petitioner was not considered for upgradation as he was at that time out of service. After his
reinstatement the petitioner made representation before the Director-General, Registration, on
26-9-1989 for his upgradation to BPS-17. By notification dated 13-1-1991 the petitioner was
upgraded to BPS-17 w.e.f. 22-11-1990. On 10-2-1991 the petitioner represented before
respondent No.2 for his upgradation from the due date. Thereafter, representation was made to
the Secretary, Establishment Division on 10-8-1991 through proper channel for his upgradation
and fixation of seniority accordingly. The petitioner's representation was not accepted, which
was conveyed by letter dated 10-11-1991. The petitioner then filed appeal before the Tribunal,
which was dismissed by the impugned judgment.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that as the order of removal from service had
been set aside and the petitioner remained in service, he was entitled to benefit of upgradation of
post w.e.f 29-5-1986. The question requires consideration. Leave is granted.
AA./M-2127/S Leave granted.