HAFIZ TARIQ NASIM, J.- The petitioner has filed writ petition with the prayer that the case of pro forma promotion be ordered to be placed before the appropriate Departmental Promotion Committee for consideration on merits.
2. The petitioner who was a Librarian in the Government College of Science, Faisalabad, was expecting his promotion but with no fault of his he was singled out without any justification whatsoever.
3. Aggrieved of this, he filed a representation and even invoked the jurisdiction of Punjab Service Tribunal in appeal No. 2359/2003 which was disposed of with the direction to the respondents to decide the petitioner's representation through a speaking order, after hearing him.
4. The learned counsel submits that despite the directions of the Service Tribunal, the respondents kept waiting for the superannuation of the petitioner and did not decide the long outstanding grievance and ultimately the petitioner attained the age of superannuation and was retired but simultaneously his grievance for the grant of promotion did not advert to.
5. The learned Assistant advocate General submits that as per new provisions of law and policy, the petitioner cannot ask for pro forma promotion due to his retirement, which is the sufficient ground for dismissal of his writ petition.
6. Arguments heard. Available record perused.
7. Lt is not denied by the learned Assistant Advocate General, after consulting the relevant record that the petitioner was eligible for promotion before his superannuation and it was also not denied that the said benefit was not granted due to any fault of the petitioner. However, the stance taken by the departmental representative as well as the learned Assistant Advocate General does not seem to be justified, particularly when a legitimate expectant for promotion was admittedly an eligible person, the post was available in the petitioner's quota for promotion and only on extraneous consideration the employee is victimized.
8. Lt is well settled law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan reported as Dr. Syed Sabir Ali v. Govt, of the Punjab (2007 PLC (S.C.) 957), wherein it is held; "The entitlement of the appellant for promotion was not denied rather the process of promotion was withheld on the excuse of above referred order of Tribunal. We having considered the matter, have found that the appellant was wrongly prevented tc next Promotion and discharge the her responsibilities as a result of which he wa; not only deprived of the legitimate right of promotion but as also caused permanent loss of pensionary benefit of the higher grade, ln view of the above, we direct that Departmental Authorities should proceed to consider the case of appellant for proforma promotion as per his entitlement in accordance with law and complete the process thin three months."
9. Taking strength from the law laid down supra, which of course relates to a retired employee, I hold that the action of the departmental authorities for withholding the petitioner's promotion with effect from the date of his eligibility and the occurrence of vacancy in his quota is unlawful, violative of all norms of justice and it is directed that following the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan referred above, the petitioner's pro-forma promotion case be placed before the Departmental Promotion Committee within one month positively.
10. The Departmental Promotion Committee is directed to complete this process fairly, justly and without getting influenced from any extraneous matter. The result thereof be conveyed to the petitioner under intimation to the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.
Writ petition is allowed in the above terms.