ARBAB MUHAMMAD TAHIR, J. Through the instant writ petition, petitioner impugns Office Order dated 15.05.2018 issued by the respondents whereby he along with 20 other Family Welfare Assistants of Population Welfare Department were reverted from BS-7 to BS-5 w.e.f. 21.04.2014. In addition, petitioner also prays for upgradation in BS-7 with ef fect from the year 2010 with all back benefits.
2. The case, set-up by the petitioner , is that one Muhammad Tariq, Projectionist/T echnical Assistant of their department assailed identical revision order before the learned F.S.T. vide service appeal No. 515(R) CS/2018 which was accepted vide judgment dated 06.06.2018 but his appeal was dismissed vide judgment dated 05.10.2020 on the point of jurisdiction while his review petition also met the same fate vide order dated 24.03.2021; that order of the learned FST in case of Muhammad Tariq was upheld by the Hon'ble apex Court vide Judgment dated 15.04.2019, therefore petitioner deserves the same treatment as the respo ndents paid benefits of BS-7 to one of his counterpart namely Raheel Aslam in June, 2019 while he had been treated indifferently; that under E&D Rules, applicable to the petitioner , reversion is one of the punishments, therefore, it could not have been inflicted without issuing any Show Cause Notice, Charge Sheet or holding any inquiry; that petitioner had been punished for not fault on his part; that in February 2018, four employees of respondent-department were upgraded from BS-07 to BS-09 with effect from July, 2016 and they were also paid arrears but the petitioner has been deprived of his vested and legal right, hence instant petition.
3. Petitioner , present in person, reiterated the stance contained in the memo of the petition by referring various documents available on file whereas learned AA-G, on the other hand, placed on record copy of order dated 28.01.2022 whereby claim of the petitioner and his other counterparts has been recognized by the respondent No.5.
4. Heard, record examined.
5. Copy of order dated 28.01.2022, passed by Joint Secretary (Tech), Ministry of National Health Services, Regulations and Co ordination, Islamabad (respondent No.5) shows that pursuant to orders dated 5.10.2018, Family Welfare Assistants that include Mudasser Hussain, Abdul Kareem and Shakeel Ahmad, counterparts of the petitioner , who stand at Sr. No.8, 14 and 18 respectively of impugned Office Order dated 15.05.2018 were afforded personal hearing while the departmental representative also briefed the Joint Secretary about the facts of the case.
It was concluded that "prim facie, only the department was shifted from one Ministry to another , however , the employees of District Population Welfare Office never left their department and were devolved. So the question of their induction in their own department does not arise."
6. It was further concluded that "the cases of all those petitioners who were reverted back to BS-5 from BS-7 do not hold merits and the decision of CA&DD dated 21.04.2014 to the extent of upgradation of the cadre of Family Welfare Assistant (Male & Female) BS-5 to from BS-7 was upheld". It is thus obviou s that the controversy has been set at rest by the department itself, therefore, there left no need to dilate upon merits of the case.
7. So far as claim of the petitioner with regard to his entitlement to upgradation with effect from the year 2010 is concerned, suffice it to observe that upgradation vide Officer Order dated 21.04.2014 from BS-5 to BS-7 was made pursuant to CDWP meeting held on 17.09.2019, communicated vide letter dated 31.08.2010. The petitioner had been enjoying the benefits under the Office Order dated 21.04.2014, made effective from the said date, till its recession vide impugned Office Order dated 15.05.2018 i.e. for more than four years which apparently reflects his acquiescence and bars him to agitate such ground under the principle of estoppel.
8. Even otherwise, upgradation cannot be agitated as a matter of right as it is based on policy decision of the competent authority as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Fida Muhammad v.
Government of Pakistan KPK through Secretary Education, Peshawar and others (2021 SCMR 1895 ) in terms that "Upgradation could not be claimed as a matter of right but was in fact based on a policy decision of the competent authority jotted down in a scheme/notification for its implementation across the board for particular categories of employees who fulfilled the required qualification which was normally a particular length of service in a particular pay scale." Reliance is also placed upon case of Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Chief Secretary and others v . Syed Sadiq Shah and others ( 2021 SCMR 747 ).
9. In view of above, no further proceedings in the instant writ petition are warranted. It is accordingly disposed of with no orders as to costs.