M IANGUL HASSAN AURANGZEB, J:- Through the instant writ petition the petitioner, Shehzad A.
Siddiqui, impugns the order dated 15.08.2018 passed by the Secretary, Ministry of Science and Technology ("Ministry of S&T") whereby the up-gradation of the post of Assistant Accounts Officer from BS-16 to BS-17 in Pakistan Standards and Quality Control Authority ("PS&QCA") made through notification dated 26.11.2013 was reversed as a consequence of which the petitioner reverted to BS- 16.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order dated 15.08.2018 was passed by the Secretary, Ministry of S&T after this Court passed order dated 12.03.2018 in writ petition No.3408/2017 directing him to decide the petitioner's representation; that through the said writ petition, the petitioner had challenged the appointment of respondents No.4 and 5; and that the sole ground on which the up-gradation of the petitioner was declared illegal was that the concurrence of the Finance Division had not been obtained. Learned counsel for the petitioner drew the Court's attention to letters dated 05.03.2013 and 27.10.2014 to demonstrate that an approval from the Finance Division had been obtained before the upgradation of the posts of Accounts officer and Assistant Accounts Officer in PS&QCA; and that such an approval has not been given due consideration. Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for the writ petition to be allowed in terms of the relief sought therein.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for PS&QCA submitted that the impugned order dated 15.08.2018 did not suffer from any legal infirmity; that the notification dated 26.11.2013 for the upgradation of the post of Assistant Accounts Officer from BS-16 to BS-17 had been issued by PS&QCA without the approval of the Finance Division; that such approval was mandatory in terms of the instructions contained in the Establishment Division's Office Memorandum ("O.M.") dated 20.01.2001; and that even though PS&QCA is a self accounting entity, the concurrence of the Finance Division is essential to give effect to a decision for upgradation of posts. Learned counsel for PS&QCA prayed for the writ petition to be dismissed.
4. I have heard the contentions of the learned counsel for the contesting parties and have perused the record with their able assistance.?
5. The record shows that the petitioner had filed writ petition No.3408/2017 seeking the issuance of a writ of quo warranto with respect to the appointments of Mir Hassan Khan (respondent No.4) and Shahzad Jan Kambohti (respondent No.5). In the said petition, the petitioner had relied on a report of the Fact-Finding Committee in which it was recommended that the services of respondents No.4 and 5 should be terminated as they had not completed the prescribed period of 89 days of service before they were regularized. The petitioner had sought a direction to the Ministry of S&T to decide the petitioner's representation challenging the appointments of respondents No.4 and 5. Vide order dated 12.03.2018, the said writ petition was disposed of with the direction to the Ministry of S&T to decide the petitioner's pending representation after affording him an opportunity of a hearing. The Secretary, Ministry of S&T vide order dated 15.08.2018 decided the petitioner's representation.
Perusal of the said order dated 15.08.2018 shows that the Secretary, Ministry of S&T did not interfere with the appointments of respondent No.4 and 5 on the ground that since they had been regularized pursuant to the decision taken by the Cabinet Sub-Committee, the approval of the same forum would be required to undo their appointments.
However, with respect to the petitioner, the Secretary, Ministry of S&T decided that he was liable to be reverted back to BS-16 in the light of the said Ministry's letter dated 02.04.2014.
6. The Ministry of S&T letter dated 02.04.2014 is on the record and comprises of a single paragraph which is reproduced herein below:- "I am directed to refer to the above noted subject and to state that it has come to the notice of this Ministry that the Accounts posts / cadres have been up-graded alongwith incumbents in the organizations without approval / concurrence of this Ministry, Establishment and Finance Divisions.
In this regard Establishment Division's instructions conveyed vide O.M No.F.8/36/2000-R.I. dated 20.01.2001 have to be followed. Therefore, any action taken against these instructions have no sanctity. It is therefore, requested that the above mentioned instructions of Establishment Division may be followed in letter and spirit and any action taken against these instructions are hereby declared to be null and void. An implementation report in this respect may be furnished immediately."
7. In the said letter dated 02.04.2014, the Ministry of S&T has voiced its concerns that up-gradations had been made without the concurrence of the said Ministry, Establishment Division and the Finance Division. It was also mentioned that the Establishment Division's instructions dated 20.01.2001 have to be followed. The Establishment Division's instructions contained in O.M. dated 20.01.2001 set out the up-gradation policy. Neither in the Secretary, Ministry of S&T's order dated 15.08.2018 nor in the letter dated 02.04.2014, it has been mentioned as to how the up-gradation of the posts of Accounts Officer and Assistant Accounts Officer had in any manner violated the provisions of the Establishment Division's instructions dated 20.01.2001.
8. The prayer clause of the writ petition that the petitioner is primarily aggrieved by the impugned order dated 15.08.2018 only to the extent whereby he was reverted back to BS-16. As mentioned above, the said reversion order was passed more than five years after the issuance of the notification dated 26.11.2013 by PS&QCA for the upgradation of the post of Assistant Accounts Officer from BS-16 to BS-17.
9. It is not disputed that on 26.11.2013, PS&QCA issued a notification for the up-gradation of two posts of Accounts Officer from BS-17 to BS-18 and one post of Assistant Accounts Officer from BS-16 to BS-17. The said notification was issued with the approval of the Director General, PS&QCA. As per the contents of the said notification, the petitioner had been working as Assistant Accounts Officer.
It is not disputed that the petitioner was given the benefit of the said up-gradation with effect from 05.03.2013.
10. Prior to this, the Finance Division had issued O.M. dated 03.04.2010 on the subject of "up- gradation of posts along with incumbents in departmental cadre in the Controller General of Accounts Organization." As per the said O.M., the Finance Division conveyed its approval to the up- gradation of posts including the post of Assistant Accounts Officer from BS-16 to BS-17. "
11. Letter dated 05.03.2013 from the Ministry of S&T shows that the Finance Division had already granted approval for the post of Accounts Officers in PS&QCA vide O.M. dated 03.04.2010. The Director General, PS&QCA was asked to take necessary action for the up-gradation of posts of Accounts Officer and Assistant Accounts Officer.
12. According to PS&QCA's letter dated 27.10.2014, PS&QCA is an autonomous body under the administrative control of Ministry of S&T. In the said letter, it is also stated that the Finance Division, through its O.M. dated 03.04.2010 had granted approval for the up-gradation of posts of Accounts Officer and Assistant Accounts Officer in self accounting entities. Through the said letter, the Ministry of S&T was informed that the Director General, PS&QCA had taken necessary action for the up-gradation of posts of Accounts Officer and Assistant Accounts Officer.
13. The Secretary, Ministry of S&T, while passing the impugned order dated 15.08.2018 appears to have lost sight of the fact that in PS&QCA's letter dated 27.10.2014, it had clearly been mentioned that the Directorate General, PS&QCA had taken the decision for upgradation of the post of Accounts Officer and Assistant Accounts Officer after the approval granted by the Finance Division through O.M. dated 03.04.2010. Additionally, the Ministry of S&T's letter dated 05.03.2013 also shows that the Finance Division vide O.M. dated 03.04.2010 had granted such approval. Furthermore, through the said letter, the Ministry of S&T had given a go ahead to the Director General, PS&QCA for the upgradation of the post of Accounts Officer and Assistant Accounts Officer.
14. Since the Secretary, Ministry of S&T had not given due weight in consideration to the said notification dated 26.11.2013 issued by PS&QCA; Finance Division's O.M. dated 03.04.2010; the Ministry of S&T's letter dated 05.03.2013; and PS&QCA's letter dated 27.10.2014, all of which accumulatively show that the Finance Division's approval for the upgradation of the post of Accounts Officer and Assistant Accounts Officer had been obtained before the issuance of the notification dated 26.11.2013.
15. Another curious feature of the case is that the Secretary, Ministry of S&T has reverted just the petitioner to BS-16 by holding that his upgradation was liable to be recalled on the Secretary's underrating of Ministry of S&T's letter dated 02.04.2014 or the Establishment Division's O.M.
20.01.2001, but he has refrained from reverting the incumbents/beneficiaries of the upgradation of the posts of Accounts Officers made through the same notification dated 26.11.2013. This is an unexplained paradox in the Secretary, Ministry of S&T's order dated 15.08.2018.
16. In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed, the impugned order dated 15.08.2018 to the extent of reverting the petitioner to BS-16 is set-aside; and the matter is remanded to the Secretary, Ministry of S&T for a decision afresh on the said matter after affording an opportunity of a hearing to the petitioner and by taking into consideration documents referred to in paragraphs 5 to 15 above.