Brief facts leading to this writ petition are that the petitioner while serving in the Communication and Works Department, Government of the Punjab, was promoted as Chief Engineer (BS-20) but on officiating basis on 14.07.2004 and since then he is continuously performing his duties without any interruption whatsoever but his promotion as Chief Engineer (BS-20) is not being regularized, which has caused a serious prejudice to him.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's case for regular promotion was considered by the Provincial Selection Board in its meeting dated 16.10.2006 but was deferred on account of incomplete service record with the following observation:-- "The officer may be deferred for regular promotion to the post of Chief Engineer (BS-20) due to incomplete service record.
However, he may be allowed to continue working as Chief Engineer (BS-20)."
3. Learned counsel submits that there was a complaint against the petitioner which was investigated by the Director General Anti-corruption and was filed on 05.05.2006 with a further order of proceedings against the complainant under Section 182 PPC for moving false complaint against the petitioner. This very fact is reflected from the letter dated 18.01.2007. Further submits that petitioner's two subordinates were promoted to BS-20 as Chief Engineers and he was singled out with no fault of him rather he was superseded by the PSB-I in its meeting held on 01.09.2008 with the following remarks:-- "Superseded for promotion to the rank of Chief Engineer/EDO (W&S) (BS-20) due to persistent bad reputation. Board also recommended that officer should not work as EDO (W&S) City District Govt.
Multan on officiating basis in view of the doubtful integrity."
4. The petitioner filed a representation against the said supersession with a particular submission that he is at the fake end of his service as he is going to be retired on 24.05.2009 and such like treatment shall humiliate him amongst colleagues and society, hence the wrong be rectified but unfortunately his well reasoned request was not acceded to, thus he has no alternate remedy except to file this writ petition.
5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Advocate General submits that the petitioner's case was considered by the PSB in its true perspective, he could not prove himself up to the mark and he was rightly superseded due to his reputation being a corrupt. Further submits that this Court lacks jurisdiction in the matter of supersession which is a sufficient ground for the dismissal of writ petition.
6. Arguments heard. Record perused.
7. So far the competency of the writ is concerned, it is already resolved by this Court as well as by the Hon'hle Supreme Court of Pakistan in a number of cases that in case of supersession writ is competent. If any authority is required, reference can safely be made to the cases of Muhammad Zaheer Abbasi vs. Government of Pakistan (2003 PLC (CS) 503), Muhammad Ashraf vs. Government of Pakistan through Secretary Establishment, Government of Pakistan and another (2007 PLC (CS) 669) and Muhammad lqbal and others vs. Executive District Officer (Revenue), Ladhran and another (2007 SCMR 682).
8. So far the merits of the case is concerned, with the help of learned Assistant Advocate General the petitioner's entire record which is produced by the departmental representative is perused. The same reflects that throughout service there was only one minor penalty of censure in the year 1999 but despite this penalty the petitioner was promoted in the year 2000 as Superintending Engineer and then he was promoted as Chief Engineer (BS-20) on officiating basis on 14.07.2004. The entire service record reveals that no such complaint is available which could lead the allegation of reputation being a corrupt.
9. When confronted with that whether officiating promotion as Chief Engineer (BS-20) is still in field or right from the year 2004 to-date, it was ever withdrawn or discontinued, the departmental representative, after consulting the record submits that the officiating promotion as Chief Engineer (BS-20) awarded to the petitioner by the competent authority in the year 2004 was not withdrawn or discontinued and that the petitioner is enjoying with the same even today.
10.When all these facts are admitted as referred above, it is really shocking that on one hand the department insists on the allegation that the petitioner having reputation of being a corrupt officer is allowed to continue as Chief Engineer on officiating basis but on the other hand the word Officiating is not beings converted into Regular on the pretext of that very allegation, which otherwise could not qualify a civil servant for his retention in service even for a single day.
11. Neither the departmental representative not the learned Assistant Advocate General could justify the reasons of supersession which is made the basis for filing of this writ petition. It is well settled law that mere allegation of corruption without its substantiation through some material fact/record is nothing but an absurd accusation having no legal sanctity.
12. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner is going to superannuate in near future and regularization of his officiating promotion, which he otherwise is enjoying since 2004, shall not cause any prejudice to any of the petitioner's colleagues and it shall not harm to the Government too, who otherwise is benefiting him since 2004 by allowing him to get all benefits of the post of Chief Engineer. In the attending circumstances, the impugned supersession dated 01.09.2008 is declared illegal, set aside and is converted into deferment. Resultantly, the writ petition is allowed and Respondents No, 1 and 3 are directed to place the petitioner's case for regular promotion before Respondent No, 2 i,e, Provincial Selection Board-I, who shall consider the same in its forthcoming meeting fairly, justly and without being influenced from any previous supersession/extraneous consideration. The entire exercise shall be finalized within a period of six weeks from today.