GHULAM MUSTAFA MUGHAL, J. The titled appeal, by leave, has been directed against the judgment passed by the High Court on 16.1.2019, whereby while accepting the writ petition filed by the appellant, herein, the respondents, appellants herein, have been directed to up-grade the post of Calligrapher B-16), occupied by the respondent in grade B-16.
2. The brief facts, forming background of the appeal are that the respondent, herein, filed a writ petition before the Azad Jammu and Kashmir High Court on 11.7.2017, alleging therein that he was initially appointed as Calligrapher (B-6) in the Council of Islamic Ideology, on the recommendations of the respective selection committee, vide order dated 18.2.2015. It was further alleged that the petitioner/respondent, herein, is an employee of the technical cadre and no clear avenue for further promotion is provided for the post occupied by him in the Council of Islamic Ideology. It was further stated that the post of Calligrapher has been up-graded in the other departments of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Government, in the light of the judgment of this Court dated 14.5.2014, rendered in the case titled Khalil Ahmed Sehrai v. Secretary Finance and others but in the Council of Islamic Ideology, the same has not been up-graded. It was further stated that time and again the petitioner, respondent herein, moved to the concerned authority for rederessal of his grievance but the needful was not done, hence, he is constrained to file the writ petition. The writ petition was contested by the other side by filing written statement, wherein, it was stated that the petitioner, respondent herein, is not an aggrieved person as his know any legal right has been infringed, therefore, the writ petition may be dismissed. The learned High Court, after hearing the parties, through the impugned judgment dated 16.1.2019, accepted the writ petition through the impugned judgment.
3. Mr. Muhammad Noorullah Qureshi, advocate, counsel for the appellants, argued with vehemence that the impugned judgment passed by the High Court is arbitrary, perverse, illegal and violative of law. He further argued that the learned High Court has issued direction for up- gradation of the post without there any financial concurrence and the judgment of this Court relied upon by the learned High Court has no nexus with the case in hand, hence, the rule of law laid down in the said case is not attracted to the facts of the case in hand. While referring to the relevant rules, the learned counsel submitted that so far as the post in question is concerned, there is an avenue for further promotion of the respondent and the case of the Calligrapher serving in the Islamic Ideology Council is not at par with those, who are serving in other Departments of the Government of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. The learned counsel argued that the question of discrimination in this case does not arise.
4. Syed Shahid Bahar, advocate, counsel for the respondent, defended the judgment passed by the High Court on all the score. The learned counsel vehemently argued that the financial concurrence in the case in hand has been given by the Finance Department and the learned High Court has rightly issued the direction and removed the discrimination and discriminatory treatment while accepting the writ petition filed by the respondent. The learned counsel further argued that the appeal has been filed by the Government in violation of the Law-Manual, which discourages the filing of baseless appeals.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost care.
6. So far as the first contention of the learned counsel for the appellants, that the direction has been issued by the High Court while bypassing the Finance Department, is concerned, that is devoid of any force. A perusal of the impugned judgment reveals that in pursuance of the summary moved by the Secretary, Islamic ideology Council, the Finance Department has given concurrence for up-gradation of the post in question on 27.1.2017, as the other similar posts have been up-graded in Pakistan as well as in the Azad Jammu and Kashmir and the learned High Court has supported its judgment with the case-law including the judgment of this Court, dated 14.5.2014.
The contention of the learned counsel regarding further avenue for promotion is also not correct, because the posts of Junior Clerk have been up-graded and no amended rules have been placed on the record from which it could be ascertained that the post of Calligrapher can still be considered for further promotion or not. Be that as it may, as the other posts of the same nomenclature have been up-graded in various other departments, therefore, the respondent is also entitled to the same treatment under law and there is no justification to refuse him the relief, which has been given to the similarly placed other people.
The result of the above discussion is that finding no force in this appeal, the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.