' A.O. RAZIUR RAHMAN (MEMBER).-- The appellant, who was selected as a Time-Scale Cleck (equivalent to present L. L. C.) in the Telegraph and Telephone Department, on 31-3-1975, after promotion as Head Clerk (Lower Selection Grade) and, later, as Head Clerk (Higher Selection Grade) (N. P. S.-11), was confirmed in the last grade on 8-5-1975. The next post to which he could be promoted was that of Assistant Director. According to the rules for promotion to the posts of Assistant Directors (Directory), in Grade-16, in the Telecommunication Regions of the T&'T Department, as laid down in Notification No, E.3815/75, dated 6-7-1976, posts of Assistant Directors (Directory) were to be filled in by promotion, through selection. This was to be done by selection from amongst the officials in the concerned Region who held the posts specified in the Notification and possessed the qualifications and experience mentioned therein. Those eligible were Office Superintendents/Higher Selection Grade Clerks and Stenographers in the Senior Scale. In both cases, the required experience was 5 years', service in the job. According to the appellant, he had put in more than 5 years as Higher Selection Grade Clerk in the Islamabad Telecommunication Region, when, on 10-1-1982, the respondent, who was then holding the post of Assistant Director (Directory), in the Central Telecommunication Region, was transferred and posted as Assistant Director (Directory), in the Islamabad Telecommunication Region. Since this posting involved the appointment of the said Respondent to a post for which, according to the appellant, he was not eligible, the appellant preferred a departmental appeal on 27-2-1982. This appeal was dismissed by the D.G., T&T on 21-8-1982 and the fact was communicated to the appellant on 6-9-1982.
Against this appellate order of the departmental authority, the appellant came in appeal before the Tribunal on 5-10-1982. The appeal, having been admitted, came up for hearing today and is being disposed of by this order.
2. A preliminary objection was raised, on behalf of Respondent No,l. It was stated that respondent No,2 had been promoted as Welfare Officer (Subsequently redesignated as Assistant Director, Welfare) in Grade-16, as far back as 19-4-1978 and that it was on the basis of this promotion that he was later posted as Assistant Director (Directory).
' Therefore, the real' cause of action accrued to the appellant in 1978. But, since he did not appeal against the said promotion on that date, he cannot agitate the matter after the lapse of more than 4 years. The appeal, it was argued, was thus barred by limitation and deserved to be dismissed on that ground.
3. After hearing both the parties at length on the question, and perusing the relevant documents on record, we have come to the conclusion that there is no merit at all in the preliminary objection raised by respondent No,1. The appellant's grievance against the Department is not that respondent No,2 was promoted as Welfare Officer on 19-4-1978, but that he was wrongly posted as Assistant Director (Directory), in the Islamabad Telecommunication Region, on 10-10-1982. At the time the posting was ordered, respondent No,2 was posted as Assistant Director (Security), in the Central Telecommunication Region. His appointment being that of Assistant Director (Security), he could not be posted as Assistant Director (Directory), as the two posts were not interchangeable.
He could also not be posted from the Central Telecommunication Hegion to the Islamabad Telecommunication Region, because all Assistant Directors (Directory) were to be appointed, under the Notification already referred to, by selection from amongst officials in the concerned Region and not by transfer from one Region to another. That being the position, it is clear that the appellant has not impugned the promotion of respondent No,2, as Welfare Officer, but his posting as Assistant Director (Directory), in the Islamabad Telecommunication Region, which was ordered about 4 years later. The preliminary objection is, therefore, rejected.
4. Coming to the merits of the appellant's claim, we find that the rules relating to the appointment of the Assistant Director (Directory), as already mentioned, are laid down in the Notification, dated 6-7-1976. This Notification relates only to the method, qualification and other conditions for appointment to the posts of Assistant Directors (Directory), in Grade-16, in the various Telecommunication Regions. So far as the other Assistant Directors are concerned, namely, those of Security, Welfare, Examination, Administration and Hostel, the rules for appointment to these posts are laid down in another Notification, bearing No,E(1)1-/78, dated 18-5-1980. It is clear from the existence of these two separate rules that while the other Assistant Directors mentioned were treated as one group, for the purpose of appointment, the Assistant Directors (Directory) were treated as an altogether separate group. From this, it follows that Assistant Director (Directory) could not be posted as Assistant Director, in another section, for example, Security or Welfare.
Similarly, any of the other Assistant Directors, for example, Assistant Director (Security) or Assistant Director (Welfare), could not be posted as Assistant Director (Directory). The posting of respondent No, 2 as Assistant Director (Directory), on 10-1-1982, was, therefore, a clear violation of the existing rules. Moreover, the said respondent could not be transferred from Central Telecommunication Region to Islamabad Telecommunication Region, because, according to the Notification, dated 6- 7-1976, the post could be filled only by promotion of officials in the same Region and not by importation from another Region.
5. The learned counsel for the respondent Department stoutly defended the posting as a routine transfer and posting order and emphatically reiterated the departmental line, which was stated in the Director-General's order, dated 21-8-1982, by which the appeal had been dismissed. Therein, it had been asserted that "in 1978 Stenographers of Grade 11 were eligible for promotion/selection as Examination Officer/Welfare Officer". It has been further claimed that "Mr. Sirajul Haq was initially promoted against those posts. His posting as Assistant Director (Directory), Islamabad Telecommunication Region, Islamabad, is a subsequent act of administration and quite in order."
He could not adduce any plausible argument in support of this stand. When it was pointed out to him that, in the absence of any provision in the rules, to the effect that an Assistant Director of another section could be posted as Assistant Director (Directory), we could not accept the contention that the post of Assistant Director (Directory) could be filled by any other Assistant Director, he had no arguments to rebut this view, respondent No,2 also asserted that all posts of Assistant Directors were interchangeable, but he could not produce any evidence in support of his stand.
6. In the light of the above, we cannot accept the contention of the respondents that the posting of respondent No,2 as Assistant Director (Welfare), in the Islamabad Telecommunication Region, when he was serving as Assistant Director (Security), in the Central Telecommunication Region, was in accordance with the rules. That being so, the appellant's contention is upheld that the appointment of respondent No,2, being contrary to the rules, violated the right of the appellant to be considered for promotion as Assistant Director (Directory), in the Islamabad Telecommunication Region.
7. In the result, we accept the appeal and hold that the posting of respondent No,2, as Assistant Director (Directory), Islamabad Telecommunication Region, being against the rules, was illegal and inoperative. We further direct that the case of the appellant for promotion as Assistant Director (Directory), with effect from the date of posting as such of respondent No,2, for which the appellant was eligible under the rules, should be considered and decided on merit, without further delay.
8. With the above order the appeal is allowed. No order as to costs.