' AZHAR SALEEM BABAR (MEMBER).--- The above titled appeal has been addressed against the notification dated 12-2-2009, whereby the appellant has been transferred to Operation Sub- Division Electricity, Muzaffarabad as Sub-Engineer. The appeal was filed on 23-2-2009 and it was admitted for regular hearing on 24-2-2009. The notification under appeal was suspended in pursuance of the order of admission of appeal. An application on behalf of respondent No,4 was moved for vacation of the order of suspension but in the circumstances of the case, it was decided that instead of arguing the case on interim relief, the final arguments be heard and the hearing of the case be expedited on priority basis.
2. The facts culminating into the instant appeal are that the appellant is a Sub-Engineer in the Electricity Department of Azad Jammu and Kashmir who was awarded selection grade B-16 in the year 1992. The appellant claims that he falls in S.No,13 of the seniority list of Sub-Engineers, whereas respondent No,4 is on S.No,15. It has also been asserted that the employees listed in the seniority list from S.Nos.1 to 10 have already been promoted as Sub-Divisional Officers, whereas Abdul Majeed at S.No,11 has also been promoted.. The appellant claims that Amapullah Ghazi falling at S.No,12 in the seniority list does not qualify for promotion, so the appellant is senior most Sub-Engineer to be considered for the job of Sub-Divisional Officer. The appellant has further contended that he was appointed as S.D.O. Sub-Division Danna in his own pay and scale vide notification dated 28-10-2000. The appellant disbursed his duties in Sub-Division, Danna for 4 years and after that the appellant was transferred to Sub-Division Neelum Valley on 3-11-2004 and the charge of the post of S.D.O. Was also assigned to him in addition to his original duties. The appellant feels aggrieved of the notification of the transfer impugned for the reason that the appellant is the senior most in the list of Sub-Engineers and the charge of the post of Sub-Divisional Officer cannot be snatched away from him by reason of simple transfer. It has also been contended on behalf of the appellant that in the presence of a senior employee, the charge of senior post cannot be given to a junior person.
3. The respondents filed objections to appeal on 24-3-2009 and contended that the appellant does not have a locus standi to file the instant appeal and that the appellant does not fall within the definition of an aggrieved person. Moreover, that the necessary parties to the appeal have not been impleaded, so the appeal is not maintainable. It has also been contended that the appellant is a Sub-Engineer who was given the additional charge of S.D.O. As a stop-gap arrangement which is liable to be terminated on the appointment of any regular Sub-Divisional Officer. While elaborating the situation, it has also been contended on behalf of the respondents that the appellant has been transferred to Muzaffarabad from Neelum valley after a period of 4 years and that the appellant has been transferred in his own pay, scale and position, so he has no vested right to occupy the position of a senior post by using the shoulders of the Court. The appellant filed replication as well. However, the contents of replication are mere further elaboration of the memorandum of appeal.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties on 9-4-2009 and have gone through the relevant record of the case. The main grievance of the appellant in the instant case is that he is senior to the respondent and in the presence of a senior civil servant, a junior cannot be assigned the charge of a senior post. If we examine the contention of the appellant in the light of the prevailing service laws, we find that assigning the additional charge of a senior post is not provided by the service laws. The recognized modes of promotion under the provisions of service laws are current charge, officiating basis and regular promotion. Assigning the additional charge of a senior post may be considered as nothing more than a stop-gap arrangement and it cannot be claimed as a right. Furthermore it cannot be overlooked that the appellant is a Sub-Engineer in the Electricity Department who was performing his functions as such in Neelum Valley and now through the impugned notification, he has been transferred to the post of Sub-Engineer at Muzaffarabad Headquarter. Nothing wrong looks to have been committed in such a situation., However, it is regrettable that the posts of Sub-Divisional Officers in the Electricity Department are lying vacant since many years because of slackness of the high-ups in the Electricity Department.
It is because of such slackness that the appellant was given the additional charge. Of Sub- Divisional Officer 9 years ago for the first time. The authorities in the Electricity Department are directed in such a situation to fill the posts of Sub-Divisional Officers in accordance with law. As stated earlier, possessing the additional charge of a senior post is not a vested right of a senior employee, so the appeal does not merit any further consideration. It is also worth mentioning that the seniority list of sub-Engineers submitted by the appellant indicates that Amanullah Ghazi, Sub- Engineer is senior to the appellant in service. Although the said Amanullah Ghazi does not have a diploma of 3 years in the relevant field, however, the condition of diploma has been relaxed as enumerated in the seniority list. If the plea of seniority is considered, the appellant does not fall within the definition of an aggrieved person because one senior to him has not approached the Court nor has he been arrayed as party in the line of respondents. In such circumstances, the appellant does not fall within the definition of an "aggrieved person".
5. In the light of what has been discussed above the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.