' MUHAMMAD ALAM, J.--- Petitioner has sought his promotion as Private Secretary (BPS-17) w.e.f, 22- 10-2009, through this writ petition.
2. In the grounds of petition, petitioner has contended that he was appointed as Stenographer in BPS-15 on 06-10-2002. Later on, the post of Stenographer was upgraded from BPS-15 to BPS-16 through Notification No,KIU-Senate-1(5)/2013/22516 dated 31st July, 2013. Prior to the said up- gradation, petitioner was transferred from Stenographer (BPS-15) of Dean Office to Examination Section of KIU as Administrative Officer (BPS-16) through order dated 22-01-2010.
3. We have heard the parties and have considered the arguments advanced by the counsel for parties. Petitioner has prayed for his promotion on the ground that he has worked as Stenographer and in that capacity is entitled to be promoted to the post of Private Secretary (BPS-17). The contention of the petitioner to the extent that he worked as Stenographer is not disputed but respondents contend that petitioner accepted the post of Administrative Officer (BPS-16), therefore, now petitioner cannot be promoted as Private Secretary (BPS-17). It is not disputed that the petitioner was appointed as Stenographer on 06-10-2002 in BPS-15. Later on, the post of Stenographer was upgraded from BP5-15 to BPS-16. It is also not disputed that presently petitioner is holding the post of Administrative Officer (BPS-16). Petitioner accepted such promotion before the up-gradation of the post of Stenographer from BPS-15 to BPS-16. Petitioner served for more than seven (7) years as Stenographer and then was promoted as Administrative Officer (BPS-16).
The most important question debated before us is that whether petitioner can be promoted from the post of Administrative Officer (BPS-16) to the post of Private Secretary (BPS-17), and that also assuming petitioner as Stenographer because petitioner has already availed promotion by accepting the post of Administrative Officer (BPS-16) after serving more than 7 years as Stenographer. Through the petition in hand, petitioner has prayed for his promotion in BPS-17 but from the post of Stenographer. The promotion of petitioner as Private Secretary from the post of Stenographer was admittedly possible only when petitioner did not accept his promotion to the post of Administrative Officer (BPS-16). Once it is admitted that petitioner accepted his promotion to the post of Administrative Officer (BPS-16), the question rises that whether, now petitioner can claim his promotion to the post of Private Secretary, assuming him as Stenographer? Petitioner and his counsel had no reply to this question.
4. Counsel for petitioner failed to point out any discrimination with the petitioner in connection with promotion against suit post, nor the petitioner pointed out any promotion of any person depriving him from his due right of promotion etc., if any. We, therefore, hold that the petition in hand is groundless, at least at this stage of the case. This order shall not operate as any kind of estopple for promotion of petitioner if petitioner is otherwise eligible for the same.
5. . This file be consigned to record.