' ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, C.J.--- It is, inter alia, contended by Raja Muhammad Ibrahim Satti, learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court that it was observed by the learned Federal Service Tribunal in the impugned judgment dated 25-1-2006 that as per promotion policy the requirement is to score 70% marks, since petitioner had scored more than 70% marks as such was entitled for promotion in BPS-20 which observation was maintained by this Court in Civil Petition No,200 of 2006. According to the learned counsel through petitioner was qualified for promotion but his case was not placed in the meetings of the Central Selection Board held in August, 2006 and May 2007. Feeling aggrieved, he filed Contempt Petition No,69 of 2007 before this Court which was disposed of on 10- 1-2008 in following manner:- "The Secretary, Establishment Division present in person states that the case of petitioners is complete in all respects for placement before the Selection Board to be considered for promotion in pursuance of the order of this Court in the special or regular meeting whichever is earlier held and in any case, he will be considered in the regular meeting already scheduled to be held in February, 2008.
Learned counsel states in view of the direction of this Court the case of the petitioner was placed in the meeting of the CSB held on 11-2-2008 and was superseded as he had failed to meet the required aggregate threshold of 70 marks. The case of the petitioner was again placed in the meeting held on 17-7-2008 and was deferred on the ground that he has not yet earned PER for one full year after his supersession on 11-2-2008. Learned counsel stated that since petitioner was posted as OSD, therefore, PER is not required under Para 2.87 of Guide to Performance Evaluation Report.
2. In view of above, we direct Central Selection Board to consider the case of petitioner in its meeting going to be held in November, 2008. Accordingly, the contempt petition is disposed of.