SAFDAR SALEEM SHAHID, J. The petitioner has filed the instant constitutional petition with the prayer that respondent No.1 be directed to grant him premature increment on account of promotion from BS-3 to BS-4.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner while serving as Daftri in the office of District Coordination Officer was granted 2nd one step promotion from BS-03 to BS-04 w.e.f. 01.07.2014, vide order No.743-873 dated 08.06.2015, pursuant to Notification No.FD.PC-39-14/77(Pt.IV)
(APCA/2008) dated 17.06.2014, as recommended by the Departmental Promotion Committee in its meeting held on 13.05.2015. Thereafter the petitioner retired from service w.e.f. 29.12.2015 on medical ground vide order No.26-33 dated 19.01.2016, however, since he was not granted premature increment on account of promotion, for which respondent No.2 wrote letter Nos.2463-2464 dated 01.03.2017 and sent service book of the petitioner to respondent No.1, but grant of premature increment was illegally refused through letter No.1068 dated 14.03.2017. Hence this petition.
3. In the report called for respondent No.1 has mentioned that although respondent No.2 has recommended for fixation, of the premature increment in pursuance of the policy of lower grade employees is not admissible.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that respondent No.1 has no reason to disallow the recommendation of respondent No.2 for fixation of the pay, pension and premature increment of the petitioner and to forward the case to the Accountant General Punjab for clarification, when Government of the Punjab, Finance Department, through letter dated 18.07.2014 has already allowed one premature increment to the employees in BS-1 to BS-4 w.e.f. 01.07.2014.
5. Learned Assistant Advocate General resisted the arguments and argued that the petitioner was not entitled to have the premature increment for the reason that the petitioner had already been granted an increment w.e.f. 01.07.2014. It was argued with reference to the letter dated 17.06.2014 that employees of BS-01 to BS-04 are entitled to one step promotion to next pay scale twice throughout their service; first one step promotion to the immediate next pay scale after rendering 10 years of satisfactory service from the date of his regular appointment; and second one-step promotion to the next pay scale after completion of another 10 years from the date of first promotion or after rendering satisfactory service of 20 years from the date of regular appointment; and that the employees who were moved one step up with effect from 01.07.2007 in view of department Notification No. FD. PC.32-7/2007 dated 10.09.2007 will be entitled to the second one step promotion to the next scale on completion of twenty years satisfactory service from the date of regular appointment. It was argued that the petitioner's case does not fall in the category of those employees, therefore, he does not deserve for the premature increment which has been rightly refused by respondent No. 1.
6. Arguments heard. Record perused.
7. Record reveals that respondent No.2 through letter dated 03.04.2017 sought clarification of the letter of refusal to grant premature increment by respondent No.1, in the following terms:- "The case under reference has been examined in light of policy instructions of Government of the Punjab, Finance Department, Lahore. The Para No.10(i)(iii) of Punjab Civil Servant Pay Revision Rules, 1977 clarifies the observations made by your office which are reproduced for clarity.
"10(i)- When a civil servant is promoted from a lower to a higher post/scale 2 to 19, where the stage in the Revised National Pay Scale of the higher post, next above the pay of the Civil Servant concerned in the pay scale of the lower post, gives a pay increase equal to or less than a full increment of the pay scale of the higher post, the initial pay in the Revised Pay Scale of the higher post will be fixed after allowing a premature increment in the Revised National Pay Scale of the higher post.
10(iii)- Where a lower and higher pay scales have been prescribed for the same post, the pay on promotion from the lower to higher scale shall be fixed in the manner given in sub-rule (1) above."
Hence, the retired employee deserves fixation of high pay/pension by allowing premature increment under Rule 10(iii) read with Rule 10(i) of the rules ibid. As regards, the grant of annual increment w.e.f. 01.07.2014 vide notification No.FD.PC.2-2/2014 dated 18.07.2014, it was allowed to all the employees serving in BS-1 to BS-4 either they were promoted to next scale or not. In the instant case, the incumbent was promoted from BS-03 to BS-04 by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC), hence, as a matter of policy duly envisaged above, he is entitled to premature increment and re-fixation of his pay/pension accordingly."
The abovesaid letter was, however, not replied by respondent No.1 for the reason best known to him. He was under obligation to reply to the letter addressed to him by respondent No.2 for clarification. One step promotion was granted to the petitioner by Departmental Promotion Committee under the Government of Punjab, Finance Department Notification No.FD.PC-39- 14/77(Pt. IV)(APCA/2008) dated 17.06.2014, whereas premature increment was to be awarded to him under Para No.10(i)(iii) of the policy instructions of the Punjab Civil Servant Pay Revision Rules, 1977, which clearly provides that on promotion of a civil servant to a higher post/scale 2 to 19, where the stage of the higher post, next above his pay in the lower post, gives a pay increase equal to or less than full increment of the pay scale of the higher post, the initial pay of the higher post will be fixed after allowing a premature increment in the Revised National Pay Scale of the higher post.
Contention of the learned law officer that the fixation of premature increment relates to the terms and conditions of service is a valid point, but since the petitioner has already been retired, his case does not fall within the meaning of civil servant and as such the instant petition is competent before this Court. In addition thereto, since the officials who were promoted to the next higher scale along with the petitioner have been granted premature increment, the case of the petitioner is at par. Reply submitted through report and parawise comments by respondent No.1 is not logical.
8. In view of the above discussion, the petitioner has been able to make out a case for grant of premature increment. The instant petition is, accordingly allowed and respondent No.1 is directed to revise the pension of the petitioner after fixation of premature increment on account of his promotion to the next higher pay scale. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.