JAWAD HASAN, J. --- Through this Appeal, filed under Section 3 of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 (the "Ordinance"), the Appellants have called in question the legality of order dated 04.05.2016 passed in W.P. No, 14737/2016 by the learned Single Judge whereby the Appellants' petition was dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the Appellants submitted that the impugned order is illegal and has been passed without taking into consideration the real facts on record; that the juniors of the Appellants have already been promoted in the year 2006 but the Appellants are being deprived of the same, as such a discriminatory attitude has been adopted towards the case of the Appellants; that on the admission of the Department 'a vested right of promotion has been created in favour of the Appellants; that despite the fact that the promotion of the Appellants were due, the Respondents have directly recruited the new persons, therefore, male fide is apparent on the face of it.
3. On the other hand, learned' Law Officer assisted by the learned counsel for the Respondent No, 2 vehemently controverted the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the Appellants and prayed for dismissal of the Appeal. It has been argued that there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order which has been passed in accordance with law.
4. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.
5. Basically, the Appellants seek promotion against their respective posts. The record reveals that the Respondents have never denied the right of promotion of the Appellants however, stated that the 'case of the Appellants has been considered at appropriate level and they will be considered for promotion but subject to seniority-cumfitness, upon occurrence of vacancies against the promotion quota in due course of time. Therefore, the Respondents cannot be compelled to promote the Appellants when the vacancies against their promotion quota are not available. No prejudice has been caused to the Appellants either by the act of the Respondents or the impugned order. As and when the seats in the requisite quota would be available the Appellants are entitled to be considered against them. Furthermore, the learned Single Judge in the impugned order has also observed that in case the Appellants are not considered, they may have a right to agitate before the Department foras.
6. We do not see any illegality in the impugned order which has been passed strictly in accordance with law, as such does not warrant any interference by us. Consequently, the Appeal in hand, being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed.