' HAFIZ TARIQ NASIM, J.--- The backdrop of this writ petition is that the petitioner joined WASA (L.D.A.) as Sub Engineer (BS-11) in the year, 1972. After completion of 11 years' service, the petitioner was awarded BS-16 and that too after passing the departmental examination through order dated 10- 12-1983. The petitioner was further promoted as Sub-Divisional Officer (BS-17) but on. Contract basis through order dated 18-3-1987 and on acting charge basis vide order dated 3-6-1987.
2. The petitioner was considered for regular promotion as S.D.O. (BS-17) the Departmental Promotion Committee recommended his name, he was regularly promoted on 16-3-2001 and later on he was awarded move over (BS-18) on 14-5-2003.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is expecting his regular promotion to BS-18 in view of his eligibility but he is being deprived of the same on wrong premises and as such the respondents be directed to consider his promotion case for BS-18 in the next forthcoming meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submits that so far the facts of the case are concerned, those are undisputed, the petitioner is performing his duties without any complaint whatsoever, he was granted promotion to the rank of S.D.O. As per Rules but the rules do not permit a diploma holder for promotion as XEN (BS-18) and in support of his contention, learned counsel has relied on the case of Fida Hussain v. The Secretary, Kashmir Affairs and Northern Affairs Division, Islamabad and another PLD 1995 SC 701 and submits that the petitioner has no case at all and his writ be dismissed.
5. Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. The only point which is required to be resolved through this writ petition is that whether there is any embargo in the rules applicable to the WASA employees, whereby the department's stance could be substantiated that a diploma holder cannot be promoted to the post of XEN (BS-18) and whether the law relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondents is applicable in the present case or not?
7. For filling the post of Grade-17, L.D.A. (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Regulations, 1978, provide the following method/criteria:-- {{TABLE}} "Pay Scale Name of the post Appointing Authority Minimum qualification for initial recruitment Method of recruitment. Grade-17 Assistant Managing Bachelor's 80% by initial Director Director Degree in recruitment or deputation (Engineering) Civil/ from Government; and Mechanical/ Electrical Enoint...Ering 20% by promotion on the basis of seniority-cum- fitness from amongst from a Sub-Engineers with at recognized least 10 years service as University. Sub-Engineer.
If suitable candidates are not available vacancies to be filled by deputation from Government." {{TABLE}}
8. When confronted with this that whether the petitioner despite his status of diploma holder, was promoted to the post of SDO against 20% quota as per regulations, the learned counsel for the respondents after consulting the record frankly conceded that the petitioner was of course promoted as SDO/Assistant Director (Engineering)(BS-17) as per quota of promotees.
9. When the promotion of the petitioner as SDO is admitted, then I have to advert to the regulation concerning promotion to Grade-18, r which is reproduced as follows:--{{TABLE}} "Pay Scale Name of the post Appointing Authority Minimum qualification for initial recruitment Method of recruitment. Grade-18 Deputy Managing -- By promotion on the Director (Engineering) Director basis of seniority-cum- fitness from amongst Assistant Directors (Engineering)/Junior Maintenance Engineers S.D.O. With at least 5 years service in Grade- 17" {{TABLE}}
9. A plain reading of Regulation/eligibility/criteria for promotion to the post of Deputy Director (Engineering) (BS-18) conveys a clear message that there is no condition. Of passing B.Sc.
(Engineering) or there is not a slightest bar/embargo on the promotion of any diploma holder to the post of Deputy Director (Engineering), provided he is the holder of post of Assistant Director (Engineering)/Junior Maintenance Engineer/S.D.O. With at least 5 years service in Grade-17. There is no denial by the respondents that the petitioner was promoted as Assistant Director (Engineering)/S.D.O. On regular basis in the year, 2001 and since his promotion he has put more than seven years against the said post, which was a mandatory requirement for further promotion to the rank of Deputy Director (Engineering).
10. It is well settled law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan that "if a thing is required to be done in al-particular manner, it must be done in that manner only and not otherwise".
12. It is also settled by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan once for all in the case reported as Accountant General, Sindh and others v. Ahmad Ali U. Qureshi and others PLD 2008 SC 522 that "rule of harmonious interpretation is to be followed in case of IH interpretation".
13. Even otherwise, in the present case plain reading of Regulations, 1978 which are applicable to the petitioner's case do not require any interpretation. However, it is held that the Regulations ibid do not make any bar on the departmental authorities to promote a diploma holder to the post of Deputy Director (Engineering), provided he fulfils the conditions which are contained in the Regulations for his promotion to BS-18 as Deputy Director (Engineering), thus I hold that the petitioner is eligible for promotion to the rank of Deputy Director (Engineering) and as such the respondents are directed to place the petitioner's promotion case in the forthcoming meeting of the Departmental Promotion/Selection Committee, who shall consider the same fairly, justly and without being influenced from any observation made by the departmental authorities previously.
' Writ petition is allowed in the above terms.