' CH. MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM ZIA, J.---The captioned review petition is addressed against the order of this Court dated 13-4-2006, whereby the petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court dated 11-3-2006 was dismissed.
2. Precise summary of facts giving rise to this review petition is that the petitioner, was retired on 1- 9-2000, as Personal Assistant of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir High Court. The service history of the petitioner is that he was inducted into service as stenographer on 19-5-1966 and finally on 23- 5-1999, he was promoted in grade B-15. Later on, he was awarded grade B-16 as selection grade w.e.f, 1-7-1983. He was moved over in grade B-17 w.e.f, 1-12-1992. After his retirement, vide order dated 16-1-2001, successive move over in grade B-18 was sanctioned in his favour, but the respondents declined to implement the order, thus he filed writ petition in the High Court on 7-11- 2001. The learned High Court, vide judgment dated 22-3-2002, accepted the writ petition. In the writ petition, he categorically claimed that he is entitled to be moved over in grade B-18 w:e.f. 1-12-1999.
It appears that the matter has not ended here. He further, on the basis of a verification, allegedly issued by the District Accounts Officer Mirpur, claimed that he is entitled to move over in grade B-19 w.e.f, 1-12-1995 and on the basis of this verification, it appears that he succeeded in getting issued an order from the Registrar High Court on 13-3-2004, whereby move over in grade B-19 was sanctioned in his favour w.e.f, 1-12-1995. The petitioner, on the basis of this order, submitted bills for payment of emoluments, but the same were turned down by the concerned. Thus, he was constrained to file writ petition in the High Court for implementation of the order of Registrar High Court, which was contested by the respondents, by filing written statements wherein it was averred that although the petitioner was not entitled to move-over in grade 113-18 but the benefit of the same was extended to him by honouring the judgment of the High Court whereas neither under rules, he is entitled to move-over in grade B-19 nor any such decision has been given by the Courts.
The learned High Court, after completion of the required proceedings, finally dismissed the writ petition vide order dated 11-3-2006. The petitioner, feeling aggrieved, challenged the propriety of the judgment through the petition for leave to appeal before this Court which was dismissed vide order dated 13-4-2006. The instant review petition has been filed against this order of dismissal of petition for leave to appeal.
3. Ch. Jehandad Khan, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner, after detailed statement of facts of the case and brief history of litigation, mainly focused his arguments on the point that the order under review has been handed down on the sole ground that according to rules, the civil servant cannot claim two successive move-over grades whereas this condition is not applicable to the employees of grade B-1 to B-15. It is only applicable to the employees of grade B-16 and above.
The order under review is against the statutory provision, hence, the error and mistake is apparent on the face of record thus, review is justified. In support of his contention, he placed reliance upon Muhammad Rafique's case 1995 SCM R 1549 and 2006 PLC 460.
4. While controverting the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Bostan Chaudhry Advocate, the learned counsel for the respondents, seriously opposed the review petition on the ground that the whole process of sanction of move over grades, in favour of the petitioner, on the face of it, is fake and fishy. The petitioner has manoeuvred his illegal move-over in grade B-18 whereas he is only entitled to move over in grade B-17. He specifically referred to move over order in grade B-18, passed in his favour. He submitted that the order of move over in favour of the petitioner in grade B-18 has been sanctioned w.e.f, 1-12-1999, which is still holding the field. This order is neither amended nor recalled whereas he was retired from service on 1-9-2000. Thus, the question of further move over does not arise because after getting move over in grade B-18 w.e.f, 1- 12-1999, he remained in service less than a nine month's period. He further submitted that the condition of successive move-over is also attracted in cases of the employees of grade B-1 to B-15.
It is wrong to say that this condition has no application to the employees of grade B-1 to B-15. He further submitted that it is very strange that the petitioner, without any proper order of the authority, only on the basis of some manoeuvred verification issued by District Accounts Officer Mirpur, has claimed the move over in grade B-19. Thus, according to his version, the review petition has no substance which is not maintainable.
5. I have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record. Admittedly, move-over in Grade B-18 has been sanctioned in favour of the petitioner after his retirement. The validity of the order of move over in grade, B-18 is least concerned because it has now become the past and closed transaction in the light of Court's judgment.
6. In this lis, the only question which requires deliberation, is the claim of the petitioner for move over in grade B-19. The petitioner, himself has brought on record the order of move-over in Grade, B-18, sanctioned on 16-1-2001 which speaks as under:-- {{URDU TEXT}} ' The perusal of this order clearly reveals that the authority has sanctioned move-over in grade, B- 18 on 16-1-2001 w.e.f, 1-12-1999. This order is holding the field. Neither it has been amended nor challenged by the petitioner rather he has himself, in the previous writ petition, claimed that he is entitled to move-over grade, B-18 w.e.f, 1-12-1999. The prayer clause of the writ petition reads as following:--- "It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that the writ petition may be accepted and the impugned orders dated 20-3-2001, that the petitioner was entitled to get move-over B-18 being the Non - gazetted employee of B-15 w.e.f, 1-12-1999, and respondents Nos.1 to 4 may be directed not to recover the above amount from the petitioner till the decision of the writ petition. Any other relief permissible under rules, may be granted with costs."
7. That the authority sanctioned move-over in favour of the petitioner in grade B-18 w.e.f, 1-12-1999, subsequantly in writ petition he has also clearly stated that he is entitled to move-over in grade, B- 18 w.e.f, 1-12-1999. But it is very funny that now he claims to be entitled for move-over in grade, B-19 w.e.f, 1-12-1995, even four years prior to move-over in grade, B-18. Such a funny claim has rightly been refused by the learned High Court as well as this Court through the order under review. In the judgment under review, it has rightly been observed that the petitioner is not entitled to move-over in grade, B-19.
' Another aspect of the case that the petitioner was retired from service on 1-9-2000 which means that he was retired from service within 9 months period from the effect of move-over in grade, B-18.
Leaving aside whether successive move-over is permissible under law or not, for the sake of argument, if it is presumed that the successive move-over is permissible, even then for sanction of further move-over in next grade, the statutory condition is that the employee must have at lest served for one year in the last move-over scale whereas the petitioner even has not completed the statutory required period. Rule, 8 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Servants Pay Revision Rules, 1977 which deals with the admissibility of next higher Revised National Pay Scale, is reproduced as under:---
8. "Admissibility of next higher Revised National Pay Scale.- --(1) A civil servant holding post in Revised National Pay Scales Nos.1 to 15, who has reached the maximum of a Revised National Pay Scale shall be allowed to next higher revised N.P.S with effect from the 1st day of December of the year in which he completes one year of such service at the said maximum as counts for increment under the rules, subject to the condition that (i) there is no adverse entry in his Annual Confidential Reports for the last four years and (ii) he has passed such a test or examination as the Government may prescribe from time to time. If these conditions are not fulfilled, he shall wait at the said maximum till he has earned in succession four Annual Confidential Reports without any adverse entry and has passed the prescribed test/examination and his move-over to the next higher National Pay Scale shall take effect from the 1st day of December of the year in which he fulfils both the conditions.
2(a). A civil servant who has reached the maximum of Revised National Pay Scale No,16 or 17 shall be brought to Revised National Pay Scale No,17 or 18 respectively with effect from 1st day of December of the year in which he completes three years of such service at the aforementioned maximum as counts for increment under the rules subject to the conditions that (i) there is no adverse entry in his Annual Confidential Reports from the year of reaching of maximum up to the year of moving over (both years inclusive) and (ii) he has passed such a test or examination as the Government may prescribe from time to time. If these conditions are not fulfilled he shall wait at the maximum till he has earned in succession four Annual Confidential Reports without any adverse entry and has passed the prescribed test/examination and his move-over to the next higher National Pay Scale shall take effect from the 1st day of December of the year in which he fulfils both the conditions.
(b) A civil servant holding post in Revised National Pay Scale No,16 shall be allowed to move-over only to Revised National Pay Scale No,17 and the one holding post in Revised National Pay Scale No,17 shall be allowed to move-over only to the Revised National Pay Scale No,18.
(3) Where for a class of posts, apart from the ordinary pay scale, a higher pay scale has been provided for a percentage of the number of said posts i.e, selection grade, the higher pay scale shall be admissible to holders of the posts in BS-1 to BS-15 after a minimum length of two years service and a minimum length of five years service in the cases of BS-16 and above in the ordinary pay scale of posts. The Higher Pay Scale shall be allowed on seniority-cum-fitness basis on the recommendations of the appropriate Departmental Promotion Committee of Board." (Underlining is mine)
9. The petitioner has not challenged the order dated 16-1-2001, whereby move-over in grade, B-18 was sanctioned in his favour w.e.f, 1-12-1999. If, in his opinion, he is entitled to move-over in grade B- 19 w.e.f, 1-12-1995, he should have objected the order of sanctioning of move-over in grade, B-18 which has not been done so. Thus, it will be deemed that he accepted the order without any objection and he is estopped by his own conduct to dispute the validity of this order.
10. The opinion expressed in the order that the petitioner is not entitled to move-over in grade B-19 appears to be consistent with the statutory provisions. Thus, there is no any substantial legal error or mistake in the impugned order. The petitioner has failed in justifying his claim according to statutory provision. The powers to grant grades, is a sacred trust bestowed upon the authorities, hence, this power cannot be exercised like to distribute palms as charity.
' So for the case-law referred to by the petitioner is concerned, the same having distinguishable facts and proposition involved, has no nexus with the case in hand, thus, is not applicable.
Therefore, finding no force in this review petition, it is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.