' QALANDAR ALI KHAN (CHAIRMAN).--- This single, consolidated, judgment is also directed to dispose of Appeal No,1734 of 2009 titled Abdul Hafeez v. Secretary Agriculture etc., because of involvement of common questions of law and facts.
2. The appellant in this appeal, Riaz Gul, and appellant, Abdul Hafeez, in the said connected appeal, were both appointed as Water Management Officers/Water Management Extension Specialists in BPS-17 by the Provincial Government on the recommendation of N.-W.F.P. (Khyber Pakhtunkhw a)
Public Service Commission, and they are still serving the department in the office of Deputy Director Water Management District Mardan as Water Management Officer and Assistant Director respectively. While claiming their entitlement to four advance increments on the basis of Finance Department letter dated 13-9-1999, they approached the department for the purpose, which required them to furnish M.Sc. (Hons) degrees, and Riaz Gul, appellant, accordingly submitted degree of Master of Engineering (M.E), while Abdul Hafeez appellant submitted M.Sc. (Hons) degree to the department; but to no avail, though fifteen other Agriculture/Water Management Officers were granted advance increments vide order dated 26-10-1999. Besides, four other Water Management Officers, namely, Hameedullah, Zahidullah Bakht Ali and Habib-ur-Rehman approached the Tribunal, and their appeals were allowed vide order dated 27-12-2002, and they were held entitled to the grant of four advance increments. The Tribunal also extended the same relief to another appellant, namely, Sultan Mehmood on 3-3-2007, in his Appeal No,420 of 2006. The appellants preferred departmental appeals, but the relief was declined to them vide memo. Dated 28-9-2009, hence these appeals on 9-10-2009, inter alia, on the grounds that they have been clearly discriminated against, though they were entitled to the grant of four advance increments on the basis of higher qualification which they possessed, and though similarly placed persons were granted advance increments, and further that this Tribunal had held all Water Management Officers holding degree of M.Sc(Hons) in Agriculture entitled to four advance increments; that the appellants have not been treated in accordance with law, and four advance increments were refused to them for no justifiable reason; and that the ground for refusal of advance increments advanced by the department, including the appellants being project employees and discontinuance of the advance increments from 1-12-2001, have already been dealt with by the Tribunal and decided in favour of the appellants in appeals against the department.
3. The respondents resisted the appeals by filing their written replies/comments, wherein, besides other legal and factual objections, the respondents raised objection to the grant of four advance increments to the appellants on the twin grounds of the appellants being project employees and the scheme of advance increments discontinued with effect from 1-12-2001.
4. The appellants also filed rejoinders to the written replies of the respondents whereafter arguments of the learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.A.-G. Heard and record perused.
5. It is not disputed that both the appellants were appointed by the Provincial Government in the Food, Agriculture, Livestock and Coop: Department as Water Management Officers/ Water Management Extension Specialists on the recommendation of the N.-W.F.P (Khyber Pakhtunkhwa)
Public Service Commission, and that they possessed the qualification of M.E. And M.Sc(Hons) in Agriculture, which made them eligible to the grant of advance increments in the light of Finance Department's (respondent No,3) letter dated 13-9-1999; but they were declined four advance increments on the grounds of they being project employees and further discontinuance of the scheme of advance increments with effect from 1-12-2001.
6. However, the appellants have not only brought on record order dated 26-10-1999, showing grant of advance increments to fifteen similarly placed persons in pursuance of afore-mentioned letter dated 13-9-1999 of the Finance Department, but also copies of judgments/decisions of this Tribunal in the years 2002 and 2007, granting advance increments to the same category of government employees. It needs be stressed here that even in the aforesaid appeals, the department had raised the same plea of appellants being project employees, but the Tribunal did not accept the plea, and declared the appellants in those appeals as government servants and, therefore, entitled to four advance increments on possessing the higher qualification of M.Sc(Hons) Agriculture, which had already been treated equivalent to M.Phil degree vide the said letter of the Finance Department dated 13-9-1999.
7. In view of the above mentioned judgments/decisions of the Tribunal in favour of similarly placed employees, who were rather batch-mates of the appellants, there was no justification on the part of the department to decline the same benefit to the appellants, and to force them to have recourse to the court of law, in the light of consistent view of the august superior courts.
8. It was vehemently argued by the learned A.A.-G. That grant of advance increments was a 'charity', which has been discontinued long before by the Government, therefore, the appellants cannot claim their entitlement to the advance increments as of right; but the contention is not tenable in view of the fact that once a benefit is extended to a government employee under a policy of the Government, then it no longer remains a 'charity', and its refusal to a similarly placed employee can aptly be described as discrimination, not acceptable under the law and canons of justice.
9. Consequently, both the appeals are accepted and by setting aside the impugned order dated 14-9-2009, the appellants are declared entitled to four advance increments under Finance Department's letter dated 13-9-1999 with effect from that date. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.