' MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.---These appeals by leave of the Court are directed against the judgment, dated 19-3-1995 of the Federal Service Tribunal through which the appeals filed by the respondents have been accepted.
2. The facts of the case are that a policy decision was taken by the Federal Government in the Finance Division on 19-2-1976 that excluding the posts held by the employees who were not diploma holders in NPS-11, 25% of the remaining posts shall be granted selection grade (NPS-16) against which only diploma holders were eligible for grant thereof. Subsequently, however, in 1991, this quota was enhanced to 33%. However, on 30-9-1992, another decision was taken by the Finance Division which was addressed to Pakistan Ordnance Factory that for the purpose of grant of NPS-16, Diploma Holder Engineers and the other employees shall be at par for grant of NPS-16 against the saidquota according to their inter se seniority as a consequence of which the appellants on account of their seniority in NPS-11 were given NPS-16. Feeling aggrieved, the respondents Diploma Holder Engineers agitated the matter by filing appeals before the Service Tribunal. The Service Tribunal came to the conclusion that subsequent decision dated 30-9-1992 was meant for the employees of Pakistan Ordnance Factory to whom it was addressed and was not applicable to other departments of the Federal Government, as such, the appellants were not entitled to benefit thereunder as such, only the Diploma Holder Engineers are eligible and qualified of the grant of selection grade 16 as was available to them according to the previous decisions of 1976 and 1991. Through judgment, dated 19-3-1996, the appeals filed by the respondents were accepted in the above terms against which these appeals by leave of the Court are directed.
3. On 4-6-2003, we passed an order directing the Finance Division to clarify as to whether the said decision of 1992 was meant for employees of all the Departments of the Federal Government or only the Pakistan Ordnance Factory. An explanation has been filed by the learned Deputy Attorney- General today clarifying the position that the said decision.Was applicable to all the Federal Government Departments. In view of this, the question arises as to whether the said decision was effective prospectively or was retrospective in its operation. According to law settled by the superior Courts, such an executive act cannot be constructed to be retrospective in operation as such did not have the adverse effect on the rights already accrued under the previous decisions.
The judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal that according to the previous decisions, only Diploma Holder Engineers were eligible for grant of NPS-16 against the reserved seats is correct but the same remained operative till 29-9-1992 and from 30-9-1992, against reserved seats becoming available, grant of NPS-16 was to be made according to the said decision without distinction whether an employee was Diploma Holder Engineer or not, according to their inter se seniority.
4. For the foregoing reasons, these appeals are partly accepted and the judgment of the Service Tribunal is modified in the terms mentioned above. As a consequence of this, the concerned Department is hereby directed to grant selection grade against the reserved seats available till 29- 9-1992 only to Diploma Holder Engineers and the question of grant of NPS-16 against the seat becoming available after 30-9-1992 shall be decided treating the Diploma Holders and the other employees at par according to their inter se seniority.
5. No order as to costs. partly.