' BARKAT ALI BALOCH (MEMBER).----The Appellant has preferred this appeal making number of prayers, which are listed below:-- "PRAYER ' In view of the. Above it is humbly prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased:--
(i) To declare that the issuance of the impugned order is infractuous, ab initio. And also declare that Pakistan Election Commission is my parent office.
(ii) To direct the AGPR office to restore payment and continuation of my salary.
(iii) To direct the Election Commission of Pakistan to withdraw its impugned order of 15th August, 2001 and consider my case for promotion by having proper Departmental Promotion Committee, in the next pay scale i.e, BPS-20.
(iv) That any action on part of the respondents Nos.1 and 2 for stoppage payment of my salary may be declared as mala fide, bad in law and of no legal consequences."
The immediate cause, giving rise to the filing of this appeal occurred when vide notification dated 15-8-2001, the respondent No,1 ordered repatriation of the Appellant from Provincial Election Commissioner, Sindh, Karachi to her parent department i.e, Provincial Government of Sindh with immediate effect. This impugned order is reproduced as under:-- "ELECTION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN Secretariat Constitution Avenue, G-5/2, Islamabad.
August 15, 2001.
NOTIFICATION No,F . 4(15)/93 -Estt- L . ---Miss Nasreen Pervaiz, DeputySecretary in the office of the Provincial Election Commissioner, Sindh, Karachi is repatriated to her parent Department i.e, Provincial Government of Sindh, Karachi with immediate effect.
2. By order of the Honourable Chief Election Commissioner of Pakistan.
(Sd.)
(R.B. Jan W.Ahidi)
Deputy Secretary (Admn.)"
2. The story emerging out of the facts and material placed before this Tribunal by the appellant as well as the respondents is no less chequered inasmuch as the appellant, who was initially an officer in Grade-17 in the Provincial Information Department, Government of Sindh, applied for the post of Director (Public Relations) BPS-19 in the office of Chief Election Commissioner and as per contention of the Appellant there was open competition for this post and as a result of such competition, she was selected against the said post of Director (Public Relations) in BPS-19 in the office of respondent No,1. This order of initial selection of the appellant is available with the memo.
Of appeal as annexure 'A/1' which is reproduced hereunder:-- "ELECTION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN Secretariat Block "S"
Islamabad, the 12th October, 1993 NOTIFICATION ' No,F.3(9)/91-Estt-I.---Consequent upon her selection as Director Public Relations in BPS-19, Miss.
Nasreen Pervaiz is appointed to officiate temporarily against the said post in the Election Commission Secretariat, Islamabad with effect from the forenoon of 11th October, 1993 and until further orders. Miss, Nasreen Pervaiz was relieved of her duties as Information Officer in the InformationDepartment, Government of Sindh, Karachi with effect from the 9th October, 1993 and after availing one day joining time on 10th October, 1993, she has assumed charge of her office in the Election Commission Secretariat, Islamabad in the forenoon of 11th October, 1993.
2. Miss Nasreen Pervaiz will be on probation for a period of one year with effect from 11th October, 1993. If no order is issued on the expiry of the fist year of probation, the period of probation shall be deemed to have been extended to another year. If no order is issued by the day following the termination of the extended period of probation, the appointment shall be deemed to he held by her until further orders.
(Sd.) 12-10-1993 (Muhammad Saleem Akhtar)
Section Officer (Estt-I)."
3. No sooner the Appellant actually joined and worked against this post at Islamabad, the competent authority vide notification dated 14-4-1994 curtailed the probation period of the appellant from one year to six months and also ordered thereby the termination of the remaining probation period and further ordered that the appointment of the appellant was deemed to be held until further orders. This notification is reproduced hereunder:-- "ELECTION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN Secretariat Block "S"
Islamabad, the 14th April, 1994 NOTIFICATION ' No,F.4(15)/93-Estt-I.----Miss Nas'reen Pervaiz was appointed as Director Public Relations' (BPS-19) in the Election Commission Secretariat, Islamabad with effect from 11th October, 1993 vide Notification No,F-3(9)/91-Estt-I, dated the 12th October, 1993 and was placed on probation for a period of one year. The competent authority has been pleased. To curtail the probationary period of Miss Nasreen Pervaiz for good and sufficient reasons from one year to six months and the same has been terminated with effect from 11th April, 1994.
2. The appointment of Miss Nasreen Pervaiz shall now be deemed to be held by her until further orders.
(Sd.)
(Rahim Nawaz Khan Durrani)
Deputy Secretary (Admn.)"
With the issuance of above notification and termination of her probationary period w.e.f, 11-4-1994, the Appellant happened to be permanently absorbed by the respondent No,1 and she became an officer/employee in BPS-19 for all intents and purposes with respondent No,1. In the meantime, as a consequence of some disciplinary action, the Appellant had also lost her job, but in consequence to an appeal made to the President of Pakistan, she was reinstated and this order of reinstatement of the appellant produced by the respondents along with their comments, as annexure 'VI' reproduced in toto as under:-- "M/O Law and Justice No,D.04/96-Law dated 17-7-1996 THE A/PRESIDENT
53. The A/President is pleased to allow the appeal filed by Miss Nasreen Pervaiz, Director Public Relations, Election Commission of Pakistan and order her reinstatement in service with immediate effect. He is further pleased to direct that the intervening period shall be treated as leave due/extraordinary as admissible under the relevant rules.
(Sd.)
Wasim Sajjad Acting President THE PRIME MINISTER No,6(88)/PS/Legal/95 dated 27, Dec.
1997.
(Sd.) 27-12-1997.
J/S(A).
Secy. Law. (Sd.) 29-12-1993 ' P.M. Sectt. U.O. No,626/DS (Estab)/96-S dated 29-12-1997"
' The purpose to quote the above referred letter of the President is material as the respondents have taken exception in their comments in respect of the subsequent departmental appeal by the Appellant, having been addressed to the President of Pakistan.
4. Initially, while receiving the impugned notification of her repatriation to the Provincial Government of Sindh on 15-8-2001, theappellant appears to have reacted in volatile manner on the same day by challenging this order of respondent No,1 by making one-page appeal on the same day viz: 15-8-2001 to the same authority i.e, Chief Election Commissioner of Pakistan, who had ordered her repatriation. This appeal of the appellant was immediately attended to in the office of the respondent No,1 and on 22-8-2001 i.e, within one week of its filing, it was informed that her appeal was considered and rejected. Thereafter, the appellant filed departmental appeal dated 19-9-2001 addressed to the President of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, giving all the facts in respect of her grievance. The copy of this departmental appeal is available with memo. Of appeal as annexure 'VIII-A'. This was followed by a letter from the President Secretariat dated 17-10-2001 that the departmental appeal of the appellant dated 19-9-2001 has been forwarded along with its enclosures to Law and Justice Division, vide annexure 'VIII-B' of the comments. It may be pointed out that on previous occasion when departmental appeal of the appellant against her dismissal was allowed by the President, the same channel viz. Secretary Law was adopted, as is evident from perusal of annexure VI, reproduced above. Till this day, there appears no response to this departmental appeal. The copy of this letter dated 17-10-2001 annexure 'VIII-B' was addressed to the appellant at her own address at Karachi. Thereafter, the appellant approached this Tribunal by filing this appeal on 16-1-2001.
5. During her tenure with respondent No,1 as Director (Public Relations) the appellant in consequence to her request was sent on deputation to Government of Sindh where she was posted as Additional Secretary, Population Welfare, Social Welfare and Women Development Department. This fact is borne out from the comments, filed on behalf of the respondent No,1 and supported by the following notification.
"No, SOI(SGA&CD)-8/14/98 GOVERNMENT OF SINDH SERVICES, GENERAL ADMINISTATION AND COORDINATION DEPARTMENT.
Dated Karachi, the 4th January, 2000 NOTIFICATION ' In pursuance of this Department's Notification of even number, dated 18-12-1999, Miss Nasreen Pervaiz has relinquished the charge of the post of Additional Secretary, Population Welfare, Social Welfare and Women Development Department with effect from 3-1-2001 (F.N.)
(Sd.)
CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF SINDH."
6. In the meantime, in the process of her frequent postings with the respondent No,1 and thereafter with the Government of Sindh, the appellant happened to suffer another blow'whereby her pay was stopped and neither the respondent No,1 nor the Government of Sindh were paying salary to the appellant. Consequently, during pendency of this appeal, vide application dated 5-10-2002, the appellant made a prayer to this Tribunal for release of the pay and allowance till final disposal of the appeal. After hearing the parties, this Tribunal vide order dated 8-3-2003, passed an order directing the respondent No,1 for continuing to pay monthly salary to the appellant along with arrears of pay till the disposal of this appeal. The respondent No,1 challenged this inter-locutory order of this Tribunal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan by filing C.P.L.A. No,581 of 2003 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court, vide judgment dated 24-4-2003 upheld the order of this Tribunal and the relevant paras. Nos.5 and 6 of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court are reproduced hereunder:-- "5. It is to be noted that the Tribunal has passed impugned order in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly, whether the Commission can repatriate her to the Government of Sindh Province after serving the Commission for a period of about eight years, during which vide notification dated 14-4-1994 on curtailing period of probation, she was allowed to continue in service till further orders. Therefore, rightly it has not touched the merits of the case.
The Tribunal undoubtedly is empowered to grant interim relief keeping in view the facts and circumstances of each case. In the case in hand, the respondent served the Commission from 12- 10-1993 up to 15-8-2001, therefore, until it is not decided whether the respondent has been rightly repatriated to the Government Sindh, it is the obligation of the Commission to pay her monthly salary, however, subject to all just exceptions. Thus, for such reasons the Tribunal has not passed impugned order arbitrarily or against well-settled principles of law governing grant of interim relief, as it has been observed in the judgment, which has been relied upon by petitioner's counsel. For convenience, relevant para. Therefrom is reproduced hereinbelow:-- "We may observe that this Court, being the apex Court, generally does not interfere with interlocutory orders passed by the competent Court, but if the same are arbitrary, capricious and against the well settled principles of law, this Court is bound to interfere with the same in order to obviate miscarriage of justice. The principle, that non-interference in interlocutory orders of the Courts below by this Court is a matter of rule andinterference is an exception, seems to be a sound principle. However, if the exercise of discretionary power through interlocutory orders is of the nature which has been referred to by us hereinabove, such a case will fall within the exception warranting interference. The present case fall within the category of exception."
6. Thus for the above discussion, petition being incompetent against interim order is dismissed. No order as to costs.
(Sd.) Iftikhar Muhammad Ch. J (Sd.) Rana Bhagwandas, J (Sd.) Syed Deedar Hussain Shah, J."
7. Responding to the act of repatriation of the Appellant by the respondent No,1 to the Government of Sindh the Government of Sindh, through the department of Services and General Administration and Coordination reacted and replied on 16-11-2001 to the respondent No,1 on the subject in the following words:-- "No, SO(SGA&CD)-8/14/98 GOVERNEMTN OF SINDH SERVICES, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION AND COORDINATION DEPARTMENT Karachi, dated the 16 Nov., 2001. - To, The Section Officer (Estate-I), Election Commission of Pakistan, Secretariat Constitution Avenue C-5/2, Islamabad.
SUBJECT:REPATRIATION OF MISS NASREEN PERVAIZ.
Sir, I am directed to refer to your letter No,4(15)/93-Estt-I dated 15-9-2001 on the subject noted above and to state that there is no dispute, with reference to policy governing the lien right.
According to said policy, Mst. Nasreen holds lien against the post of Information Officer (BS-17) till the time she is confirmed against the post of Director, Public Relations, Election Commission of Pakistan. But as far as her repatriation is concerned, the views of the Election Commission are not correct. Mst. Nasreen was appointed afresh in the Commission and, therefore, she shall remain its employee until either her services are terminated according to law or the officer herself requests for repatriation to her original post. ElectionCommission cannot therefore directly place her services at the disposal of Information Department, Government of Sindh, without solid grounds.
(Sd.)
(Ghulam Abbas Detho).
Section Officer-I"
' This letter has been produced by the Appellants as well as by the respondents before this Tribunal and is part of the record of appeal file.
8. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case, we have heard the Appellant in person and Mr. Niaz Ahmed Khan, learned counsel for the respondents. We have also perused the appeal file including the memo. Of appeal and the enclosures along with the comments filed by the respondents No,1 and the documents enclosed therewith.
9. At the very outset, the objection in respect of the appeal being time barred was raised and agitated and it needs to be settled at the initial stage. In their arguments as well as filing comments to the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay, the respondents have taken the plea of this appeal being time barred. It is contended by the respondents, in the first instance that, the Appellant is an employee of Government of Sindh and secondly the fact that the departmental appeal of the appellant dated 15-8-2001 was rejected by the competent authority vide letter dated 22-8-2001. As per contention of the respondents, the Appellant had to approach this Tribunal within 30 days of the receipt of the letter dated 22-8-2001, but according to the respondents, this appeal has been filed by the Appellant on 16-1-2002 and thus according to the respondents, it is time barred. On the other hand, the Appellant has contended that the initial appeal dated 15-8-2001 was mistakenly addressed to respondent No,1, who rejected the same without applying his mind as is evident from the order of rejection available on the record as annexure VI-A, which is reproduced hereunder:-- "BY U.M.S. No,F.4(15)/93-Estt.I.
ELECTION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN Secretariat Constitution Avenue, G-5/2, Islamabad, 22nd August, 2001 MEMORANDUM Subject: APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER ' With reference to her appeal, dated the 15th August, 2001, Miss Nasreen Pervaiz is informed that her appeal has been considered and rejected by the competent authority.
(Sd.)
(R.B. Jan Wahidi))
Deputy Secretary (Admn.)
Miss Nasreen Peraiz, 59/1, 24th Lane, Phase-VII, Defence Housing Authority, Karachi."
' The above order is not speaking order inasmuch as no reasons,whatsoever, have been mentioned in this order. Thus no legal sanctity can be extended to such perfunctory and ambiguous order. It has been further contended by the Appellant that her appeal, instead of being forwarded to the proper authority viz; President of Pakistan, the same was rejected outrightly by the respondent and the appeal to the President of Islamic Republic of Pakistan on 19-9-2001, which has not been responded till this day. According to the appellant, this appeal before this Tribunal has been filed within 120 days of the filing of departmental appeal dated 19-9-2001. The respondents have taken the plea that the Appellant is subjected to the rules, framed by the Election Commission; hence, the decision dated 22-8-2001 in respect of her departmental appeal dated 15-8-2001 is correct and that the limitation would run keeping in view this date of rejection of the appeal by the respondent No,1 on 22-8-2001. On the other hand, the appellant has not only taken the plea that it was incumbent upon the respondent No,1 to forward her appeal to the Appellate Authority i.e, President of Pakistan, but at the same time, it has been contended by her that she rightly addressed her departmental appeal to the President of Pakistan on 19-9-2001 meaning thereby that the competent authority to hear the departmental appeal is the President of Pakistan and not the Election Commissioner, who is respondent No, 1 . The other arguments in support of this contention are that it was the respondent No,1, who had ordered the repatriation of the Appellant to the Government of Sindh and had also stopped payment of salary against which this appeal has been filed and that the respondent No,1 thus was not the competent authority to hear the appeal against his own orders. This contention of the appellant finds further support from an earlier order of her reinstatement in service by the President of Pakistan in response to her departmental appeal when she was dismissed from service and then subsequently reinstated vide order dated 17-7-1996 available as annexure 'VI' with the commentsfiled by the respondents and which has also been reproduced hereinabove. This order of reinstatement of the appellant by the President of Pakistan in response to her departmental appeal shows that the appeal of the appellant to the President of Pakistan is proper and legal. Had it ' not been so, then the appeal of the appellant for her reinstatement on an earlier occasion would not have been attended to by the President but the same would have been sent to the respondent No,1 as claimed to be Appellate Authority. The respondents have reaffirmed the contention of the appellant in this respect by producing the letter of reinstatement of the appellant by the President. Thus, we are of the view that the appeal of the appellant, having been forwarded to the President of Pakistan, is proper and legal. The natural corollary culminating out of this situation is that the initial appeal of the appellant dated 15-8-2001 having been forwarded to the respondent No,1 should have been forwarded to the appropriate authority for decision, which has not been done. Under these circumstances and for the reasons given above, we don't subscribe to the view that the appeal of the appellant is time barred. Even then, we allow the application of the appellant for condoning the delay under section 5 of the Limitation Act, filed as precautionary measure, keeping in view the grounds given in the affidavit appended to the application, instead of dismissing this appeal on technical grounds.
10. Coming to the merits of this appeal, the crucial issues emerging out from the respective contentions and the arguments of the parties are whether the appellant was and is an officer/employee of the respondent No,1 or the appellant is on deputation from Government of Sindh to the Election Commission of Pakistan, as her lien is admittedly intact with the Government of Sindh. We have examined this issue in light of the fact that no doubt the appellant initially was an officer of BPS-17 in the Information Department of Government of Sindh and thereafter through an open competition on merit, she applied for a post of Director (Public Relations) in the office of respondent No,1 and the appellant was selected in this post in BPS-19 and worked against this post in various capacities at Islamabad as well as at Karachi. We need not go into the details of such postings. There is no cavil to the fact that initially the appellant, who was Information Officer BPS-17, serving with the Government of Sindh, had applied for the post of Director Public Relations BPS-19, available in the office of respondent No,1 as Election Commissioner of Pakistan. It is further admitted that the post was filled through open competition and the appellant was one of the candidates for this post and she was selected for this post as a result of her success in the open- competition. We have failed to find out any document wherein it may have been shown that the appellant had succeeded to this post of Director Public Relations BPS-19 on account of her deputation fromGovernment of Sindh to the respondent No,1. The appellant has all along been asserting that she had been appointed by selection to this post n BPS-19 on account of open competition and not because of her deputation from Government of Sindh. This fact has been confirmed by the Government of Sindh through their letter dated 16-11-2001, which has been reproduced hereinabove. This letter further affirms that the appellant has been confirmed against the post of Director Public Relations, Election Commission of Pakistan having been appointed afresh in the Commission. The keeping of lien of the appellant by the Government of Sindh in BPS- 17 was for a period of three years for the reasons that when she had applied for the post of Director Public Relations BPS-19, she happened. To be serving as Information Officer BPS-17 with Government of Sindh. This does not mean that the Government of Sindh had sent the appellant on deputation to the respondent No, 1 . The perusal of the material made available by the parties, prove that having been absorbed permanently as Director Public Relations by the respondent No,1, the appellant was sent on deputation at her request by the respondent No,1 to the Government of Sindh from where she was subsequently repatriated and sent back to the respondent No,1, being her parent department. This would prove that it was the respondent No,1, who had deputed the appellant to the Government of Sindh on deputation, being an employee/officer of the Election Commission of Pakistan and not the other way round, as claimed by the respondent No,
1. Had the appellant been on deputation from Government of Sindh to the respondent No,1, then there was no necessity for the respondent No,1, to send her on deputation back to the Provincial Government of Sindh where the appellant had worked as Additional Secretary, Population Welfare, Social Welfare and Women Development Department as is evident from notification dated 4th January 2000, which has also been reproduced above. After her repatriation from the Government of Sindh as such, she was again taken back by the respondent No,1 and whereafter, the issues of her absorption and subsequently stoppage of pay arose, which ultimately have given rise to this appeal.
11. The claims and the assertions of the appellant, made by her in her memo. Of appeal, have either been admitted by the respondents or no comments offered therefor. In this respect, we would like to narrate hereunder the claim of the appellant in her memo. Of appeal and the written replies/comments of the respondents, putting the same in juxta position:-- {{TABLE}} MEMO. OF APPEAL WRITTEN REPLIES/COMMENTS FACTS FACTS
1. That I was appointed as Director Public Relations in 1. Admitted BPS-19 in the Election Commission of Pakistan on merit through open competition vide Memorandum No,F.3(9)/ 91-Estt-I, dated 12-10-1993 (Exhibit-I) and was placed on probation for one year.
2. However, due to my hard and excellent work which was considered to be good and sufficient reason by the Competent Authority my probationary period was reduced from one year to 6 months and the same was terminated vide Notification No, F.3(9)/91- Estt-I, dated 14-4-1994 (Exhibit-II).
2. The appellant vide her application dated 12-1-1994 (Annexure-VIII) requested for curtailment of her probationary period from one year to three months. The competent authority considered her request and terminated her probationary period after six months. However, it was not curtailed on the basis of her hard and excellent work as claimed by her in the appeal. #TBS Admitted #TBE
3. That I was on deputation from the Election Commission to the Sindh Government from ' 13th March 1998 till January, 2000. #TBS 4. Admitted #TBE
4. That the Government of Sindh as result of general policy decision to repatriate all deputationists to their parent departments, in January 2000, repatriated myself also.
Accordingly, I joined Election Commission of Pakistan (Exhibit-III). {{TABLE}} So far the status of the appellant as deputationist or otherwise is concerned, the Government of Sindh has stuck to the constant view that the appellant was not on deputation from Government of Sindh, but the respondent No,1., i.e, Election Commission of Pakistan is her parent department. This fact is not only evident from the letter dated 16-11-2001, reproduced hereinabove, but prior to this, the Government of Sindh had clearly given their views in respect of thestatus of the appellant vide letter dated 27-8-2001 being annexure which is reproduced hereunder:-- "No,SOI(SGA&CD)-8/14/98 GOVERNMENT OF SINDH SERVICES, GENERAL ADMINSITRATION AND COORDINATION DEPARTMENT Karachi, dated 27th August 2001.
To, The Secretary, Election Commission of Pakistan, Islamabad.
SUBJECT: NOTIFICATION Sir, I am directed to refer to Election Commission's Notification No,F.4(15)/93-Estt-I, dated 15-8-2001, on the subject noted above and to state that Miss Nasreen Pervez was appointed as Director Public Relations (BS-19) in Election Commission of Pakistan vide Memorandum No,F.3(9)/91-Estt-I, dated the 8th October, 1993. Accordingly she was relieved from Information Department, Government of Sindh, under Notification No,SO(INF)3-29/82, dated the 9th October, 1993 and her lien was retained for a period of three years only w.e.f, 9-10-1993.
2. Repatriation of Miss Nasreen Pervez at this juncture to Sindh Government, when she no more is an employee of this Government is beyond comprehension.
3. I am therefore, directed to request the Election Commission of Pakistan to kindly consider the legal position and withdraw/cancel its notification. Yours obedient servant (Sd.)
SECTION OFFICER-I"
12. The contentions, raised on behalf of the respondents that the appellant was on deputation with them and that she was being merely sent back to her parent department, as is evident from the impugned notification dated 15-8-2001 will amount to double jeopardy and creating more anomalous situation. The respondents appear to have lost sight of the fact that if their contention in respect of the appellant being a deputationist is accepted then the result would be that the appellant, who is working at present in BPS-19, would revert back to BPS-17 the grade which she was availing at the time of her induction/selection as Director Public Relations with the respondent No,1, in case the appellant is repatriated to Government of Sindh. This act on the part of respondent No,1 is against established principles of justice, as far no fault of the appellant, she would be made to suffer to be relegated to Grade-17 from the elevated position of Grade-19. This would amount to her reversion without any reason or rhyme. On this very issue, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held elaborately in case in case of Anisa Rehman (1994 SCM R 2232) whereby no one can be reduced to a lower position or reverted without any prior show-cause notice. On our part, we would term this act by the respondents to be un-called for punishment to the appellant for if the plea of the respondents is accepted, then it would mean that the appellant is made to lose her post of Grade- 19 with respondent No,1 and being relegated to a post of Grade-17 without her fault or any reason.
We are not inclined to subscribe to this type of uncalled for relegation and reversion of the appellant from Grade-19 to Grade-17. We have already discussed that with no stretch of imagination the appellant can be treated as a deputationist from Government of Sindh to respondent No,l.
13. In view of the above facts and circumstances of this appeal and for the reasons given above, we allow this appeal as per prayer of the appellant and we further re-affirm that the impugned notification dated 15-8-2001 issued by the respondent No,1 is infructuous, ab initio and the appellant was and is declared to be an officer of respondent No,1, which is her parent office. The other prayer of the appellant in respect of her pay has already been accepted by this Tribunal and re-affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by the judgment of their Lordships dated 24-4-2003 and keeping in view this authority of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, we further order that the appellant, having been declared as officer of the respondent No,1 in BPS-19, is entitled to all the benefits of salary and other emoluments, as attached to that post.
14. Coming to the next prayer of the appellant with regard to her promotion in BPS-20, it is observed that the appellant shall have to move her case afresh, keeping in view her seniority position vis-a- vis other officers of the cadre. Thus the prayer of the appellant in respect of her promotion at this stage, need not to be touched by this Tribunal and we leave it open for the parties to deal with this issue in accordance with the established Rules and Regulations on the subject.
15. With these observations and modifications, the appeal of the appellant is allowed and the parties are left to bear their own costs.
' The copy of this judgment be forwarded to all the concerned parties forthwith. accordingly.