A. O. RAZIUR RAHMAN (MEMBER).--The Appellant, who was a Lecturer in Aitchison College, Lahore, at that time, was appointed as an Officer on Special Duty, understudy to Brig. (Recd.) C. H. B.
Rodham, Director, Pakistan Sports Board, with effect from 1st June, 1972, on a fixed salary of Rs. 1,500 p.m. The tenure of employment was to be one year, with effect from 1st June, 1972, vide Ministry Educa--tion No. F. 4-12/72-Sports, dated 16th May, 1972. The Appellant accepted the appointment, dated 17th May, 1972 and signed a contract in this behalf.
2. Subsequently, on 12th January, 1973, the Ministry of Education issued a letter appointing him as Director, P. S. B., with effect from 1st February, 1973, vice Brig. (Retd.) Rodham, on terms and conditions to be communicated later. Mr. Zakir Hussain Syed accepted this appointment, vide his D.
O. Letter No. F. 9-8/72-P S B, dated 18th January, 1973. The terms and conditions were conveyed to him by the Ministry of Education through a Memo. Dated 5th February, 1973. According to there, his pay was fixed in the scale of Rs. 1,500-501,700, and his appointment was initially for a period of three years with effect from 1st February, 1973, subject to extension, if considered necessary. The appointment was terminable on three months' notice on either side and the incumbent was required to sign a contract accepting these terms and conditions of service.
3. It appears that the Appellant did not sign the contract required, although he continued to serve against the post to which he was appointed and on 11th June, 1974, he applied for being given a contract appointment for ten years with effect from 1st February, 1974. Nevertheless, on 17th September, 1975, he applied for the extension of the term of service for a suitable period, as, according to him, his previous contract was due to expire on 31st January, 1976.
4. On 9th January, 1976, the Ministry of Education, in response to the above request, approved the extension of the contract of the officer for a further period of three years, with effect from 1st February, 1976. Even then, no formal contract deed was signed after this extension also.
5. Later, on 30th October, 1979, the officer made an application to the Secretary, Culture and Sports Division, to whom the subject has since been transferred, for a renewal of the contract for another five years. He also prayed for permanent absorption in the Ministry. The exact words used by him in this behalf were : "I shall be deeply obliged if the case for my permanent absorption in the Ministry is given sympathetic consideration to eliminate uncertainty about my future". No orders on this request were communicated to the Appellant by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism (Culture, Sports and Youth Affairs Division). But, on 14th June, 1979, his services were terminated, vide letter No. F. 4-12/ 72-Sports, issued by the said Ministry, giving him three months' notice. Thus, his services were to terminate on 14th September, 1979 (forenoon).
6. However, by order of the President, the notice of termination was withdrawn vide Memo. No. F. 4- 12/72-Sports, dated 30th September, 1979, issued by the Culture, Sports and Youth Affairs Division.
But, to this, i.e. On 25th July, 1979, by Notification No. F. 10-54/78--n., issued by the C. S. And Y. A.
Division, the Appellant was reverted from N P S 20 to N P S 19, under section 3 of the Corporation Employees (Special Powers) Ordinance, 1978 (XIII of 1978). The notifica--tion is reproduced in extenso :- "Government of Pakistan Culture, Sports and Youth Affairs Division Islamabad, 25th July, 1979.
NOTIFICATION No. F.. 10-54/78-Admn. In exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the Corporation Employees (Special Powers) Ordinance, 1978 (XIII of 1978) read with Establishment Division's Notification No. S. R. O. 1067/(1)/78, dated 27th August, 1978 the following officers of the Pakistan Sports Board, Islamabad, shall, in the public interest stand reverted to the grades specified against each with immediate effect, namely :-
1. Mr. Zakir Hussain Syed,N.P.S. 20 to N.P.S. 19 Director-General, Pakistan Sports Board, Islamabad.
2. Mr. Wajahat Javed Zaidi,N.P.S. 17 to N.P.S. 16 Assistant Director (Acctts), Pakistan Sports Board, Islamabad.
Sd/-- (Iqbal Masud), Secretary."
7. The officer preferred a departmental appeal addressed to the President of Pakistan on 17th December, 1979. In reply to this, he received a communication dated 27th February, 1980, from Abu Said Hasan, Deputy Secretary (Sports-I), informing him that his representation had been considered by the authorities concerned but regretting that .It had not been accepted, as it was time-warred, not having been submitted within 15 days, as required under the Corporation Employees (Special Powers) Ordinance, 1978. Against this order, the present appeal was filed on 13th March, 1980. It was admitted for hearing on 3rd May, 1980 and, after regular hearing on 19th May, 1982, is being disposed of by this order.
8. As noted above, the impugned order was passed under section 3 of the Corporation Employees (Special Powers) Ordinance (XIII of 1978). Which empowers the President or a person authorised by him in this behalf to remove from service or revert to his lower post or grade, as the case may be, without notice, a person in Corporation service appointed or promoted during the period from 1st January, 1972 to 5th July, 1977. The impugned order purports to revert the Appellant from N.P.S. 20 to N.P.S. 19 and the order has been passed by the Secretary, C. S. And Y. A. Division, who was authorised by the President, by a notification, dated 27th August, 1978, to take action under section 3 of the Ordinance in respect of employees, in receipt of pay in scales with a minimum of more than Rs. 600, and less than Rs. 2,650, of Corporations or institutions set up, established, managed or controlled by the Federal Government which stood allocated to his Division. It would appear that if, at the time, the impugned order was passed, the Appellant, who admittedly had been appointed during the period 1st January, 1972 to 5th July, 1977, was serving in N.P.S. 20 he could be reverted to the post fro n which he was promoted to this grade during the period in question. It, however, appears from the facts. As narrated above, that the Appellant was never appointed to N.P.S. 20 and, therefore, the question of his reversion from that grade could never arise. It also appears that he was never serving in N.P.S.19 and, therefore, the question of his reversion to N.P.S. 19 also could not arise. Apparently, the order passed under section 3 of the said Ordinance, was passed under some misunderstanding of the actual position. So far as we have been able to ascertain from the record produced by both the parties, and from the arguments adduced by them during the hearing of the appeal, the Appellant, who was a contract employee of the P. S. B., was initially appointed for a period of three years, on contract basis, with effect from 1st February, 1973. The scale of pay allowed to him was Rs. 1,500-50-1,700. The contract was terminable on 31st January, 1976. The contract was, however, never signed by the Appellant and yet it was extended for another term of three years, which meant that it again terminated on 31st January, 1979, although, even this time, the contract had not been signed by him. He, however, continued to serve without any formal extension till he was given three months' notice on 14th June, 1979, on the basis of one of the conditions of the contract. His services would thus have terminated on 14th September, 1979. But; for some reason or the other, which the concerned authority alone can explain, the case was put up before the Review Board set up for considering cases for action under section 3 of the Corporation Employees (Special Powers) Ordinance, 1978, which, after reviewing the case made its recommendations, on the basis of which the Secretary, Ministry of Culture and Tourism passed the impugned order, on the assumption that this officer was a regular employee of the P. S. B. And that he was appointed Director-General in 1973, when the post was upgraded from N.P.S. 19 to N.P.S. 20 alongwith the incumbent. The noting of the Secretary on this case in a summary put up to the President is reproduced below: "The present incumbent heading the P. S. B. Is Mr. Zakir Hussain Syed, who is the regular employee of P. S. B. In which he has been working since 1972. He was appointed Director-General in 1973 when this post was upgraded from NPS 19 to NPS 20 alongwith the incumbent. However, the review carried out by this Division in exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the Corporation's Special Powers, Ordinance, 1978 (XIII of 1978) read with Establish--ment Division Notification No. S.R.O. 1087 (1)/78, dated 27th August, 1978, found this action to be irregular and Mr. Zakir Hussain Syed was reverted to Grade-19 from Grade 20."
9. In spite of our best efforts, we have not been able to come across any paper showing that the Appellant was, at any time, appointed as a regular employee of the P. S. B. There is also nothing on record to show that, at the time the pay scale for the Director, P. S. B. Was prescribed in Grade 20, it was already in Grade 19. But, even if that be so, the correct position, so far as the Appellant is concerned, is that, after serving a period of apprenticeship under the former Director, he was appointed as Director in the pay scale of Rs. 1,500-50-1,700, which at the most was equivalent to Grade 18. Since his appointment was on contract, and not on regular basis, this contract continued to be legally enforceable and, by no stretch of logic or imagination it could be presumed that the Appellant was holding a Grade 19 post. Similarly, it could not be taken for stalled that, merely because the pay scale for the Director was prescribed in N.P.S. 20, it automatically became applicable to the Appellant. Unless the Appellant were formally appointed in Grade 20, upgradation of the post from Grade 19 to 20 would not automatically upgrade him also. We have not been shown any paper indicating that, when the post was upgraded, the incumbent of the post was also upgraded. According to rules, the upgradation of a post does not automatically lead to upgradation of incumbent also. And, in any case. Since the incumbent of the post of Director was on contract, the terms of the contract were applicable to him and not any general orders issued with regard to the terms and conditions of service of the post of Director. We are, therefore, unable to see any justification whatsoever for the Appellant making the audacious statement in his memorandum of appeal that "the petitioner was granted grade 20 from the date of his appointment in the Pakistan Sports Board." But, what we are surprised at is that the Secretary, Ministry of Culture and Tourism, stated emphatically in his summary for the President that the Appellant was appointed as Director-General in 1973, when this post was upgraded from Grade 19 to 20 alongwith the incumbent.
10. We also observe that, as already noted earlier, the Appellant himself, in his application dated 30th October, 1978, requesting for renewal of his contract for another five years, clearly accepted the Posi--tion that he was serving on contract, the extension of which was due to expire on 31st January, 1979, clearly accepted the position that he was serving on contract, the extension of which was due to expire on 31 January, 1979. This date, having already passed, the contract stood expired and the Appellant continued in service beyond the period of his tract. His services could thus be terminated at any moment. Orders to this effect were already issued on 14th June, 1979 and his services would have stood terminated on 14th September, 1979, after the expiry of the notice period of three months. This termination order was, however, withdrawn by order of the President, because the Ministry concerned had represented to the President that, since the case was already under consideration by the Review Board, the matter may pond till the decision/ recommendation of the Review Board, as already stated. The Review Board were asked to consider a case which did not exist at all- The Appellant, contrary to what the Secretary of the Ministry wrote, was not at all a regular employee of the P. S. B. And he was neither appointed to Grade 19 nor promoted to Grade 20 during the period covered by the Review. Therefore, any order reverting him from Grade 20 to Grade 19 was clearly meaningless and uncalled for.
11. The position that emerges from the above is that the Appellant, who was a contract employee of the P. S. B. And whose contract expired on 31st January, 1979, could be relieved from service at any time after this date, even without three months' notice. He was, actually given three months' notice on 16th June, 1979. But, the notice was subsequently withdrawn, and the impugned notification published on 25th July, 1979, leading to the present situation in which the Appellant has-come up with the grievance that the post occupied by him had been downgraded, whereas the relevant law, namely, Ordinance XIII of 1978, provides for downgrading of an employee and not of a post.
12. Curiously enough, the order of reversion from Grade 20 to Grade 19 was also not in accordance with the recommendation of the Review Board set up to consider cases for faction under section 12-A of the Civil Servants Act, 1973. The minutes of the, Board's meeting held on 12th December, 1978 and 19th December, 1978, are very clear on this point. In the minutes of the meeting held on 19th December, 1978, it has been recorded that: "the Board -----decided that Mr. Zakir Hussain Syed may be given option after the expiry of his present contract to further continue in his post if he accepts the existing pay scale in N.P.S. 18."
From this, it is clear that the Board neither recommended that the officer be reverted to Grade 19 nor accepted the position that he was in Grade 20 at the time of the Review. On the contrary, from the decision quoted above, it is obvious that the Board took the view that the pay scale in which thest Appellant was employed at that time was equivalent to N.P.S. 18 and that if he were prepared to accept the same scale. He may be allowed to continue in the post after the expiry of the then period of contract. In spite of this, it is observed that in a note put up to the Secretary, which was further sent up to the Minister for approval, it was mentioned that the Board had recommended that Mr. Zakir Hussain Syed be reduced in rank from Grade 20 to Grade 18. White it is factually incorrect, as already explained, that the Board had recommended reduc--tion in rank of the officer from Grade 20 to 18, the correct position is that it had recommended that the officer be continued in Grade 18. It is, therefore, not understood how the Gazette Notification dated 25th July, 1979 reverted the officer from Grade 20 to Grade 19, when, according to the noting on the relevant file, the draft of the notification, which was purported to be in accordance with the recommendation of the Board, was, put up to and approved by both the Secretary and the Minister before it was published. The date of publication of the notification and its approval is the same, namely, 25th July, 1979, and the Culture, Sports, and Youth Affairs Division may like to find out how, and by whose order, a departure was made in the notification published from the actual recom--mendation approved by the Secretary and the Minister.
13. In the light of what we have discussed, we are firmly of the view that no case whatsoever is made out for placing the Appellant in Grade 20 and that he should thank his stars that, while being retained in service after the expiry of the period of his contract, he has been placed in Grade 19.
14. With the above observations, the appeal is dismissed.
15. No order as to costs.