Messrs Abdul Salam Saeed, O.T., Teacher, Muhammad Luqman, O.T., Teacher, Muhammad Saeed Saleem, O.T., Teacher, Muhammad Ashraf, Teacher, Muhammad Afzal, Teacher, Daim Iqbal, Drawing Master and Muhammad Sarwar Aziz, Teacher, District Sahiwal, have filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, in which they have impleaded the District Education Officer, Sahiwal, Director of Education, Multan Region. Multan and the Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Finance Department, Lahore, as respondents.
2. By virtue of this appeal they have prayed that the impugned orders, dated 18-2-1984 and 17-10- 1984, be set aside and Selection Grade in N.P.S.-11 awarded to the appellants, w.e.f. 1-7-1982, be restored.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants are O.T.,S.V. And Drawing Masters and were borne on the General Cadre of Schools of Education Department in District Sahiwal. Government of the Punjab, Finance Department issued order, dated 8-8-1982, Annexure 'A', wherein Selection Grade in N.P.S.-11 was sanctioned equally to 30$ of all the regular teaching posts in N.P.S.-8 on the formula as prescribed for the award of the said selection grade. In pursuance of the said policy letter as well as formula the Selection Grade was granted on the basis of separate seniority of each category of the post and the appellants were granted Selection Grade by orders No. 215/E.II, dated 15-11-1983 and No. 1344/E.II, dated 15--3-1983, w.e.f. 1-7-1982. These orders were duly issued and implemented and acted upon. The appellants were paid the arrears of pay from 1-7-1982 till 1983. However, Finance Department issued advice, dated 26-6-1983, and in the light of the said advice the respondent No. 1 issued order, dated 18-2-1984, whereby he withdrew the orders of award of Selection Grade to the appellants, w.e.f. 1-7-1982, on the ground that the Selection Grades were awarded "due to wrong particulars" as they belonged to Provincialised cadre but Selection Grade was awarded in General cadre. The appellants submitted their representation to respondent No. 2.
Although the point raised in the representation was duly considered yet the same was rejected on the ground that the same was against the advice of Finance Department. The appellants filed Appeal No. 466 of 1984 but the same was considered premature as the appellants had not exhausted departmental remedy so available to them. As the remedy has been so exhausted, therefore, the appellants have filed this appeal before this Tribunal.
4. I have heard the parties at length and have perused the record of this case minutely with their assistance.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that this Tribunal has already decided this issue in Appeal No. 400 of 1983 Ch. Fateh Muhammad, Ch. Taj Muhammad, Hussain Ali and Ch. Muhammad Siddique v. The District Education Officer, Lahore, Director of Public Instruction (Schools), Punjab, Lahore and Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Finance Department, Lahore, by its judgment, dated 7-4-1984, and the issue in this appeal being indentical with the aforementioned appeal, therefore, the appeal of the appellants was liable to be accepted.
6. On the other hand learned District Attorney has adopted 'the comments of the Department in extenso and has resisted the same on the ground that the appellants were awarded Selection Grade by misrepresentation to Finance Department by the then District Education Officer, Sahiwal, therefore, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
7. After hearing both the parties, we have perused our own judgment, dated 7-4-1984 and find that the facts are identical with the present case and this Tribunal came to the following decision:- "That in both those cases the Tribunal has taken the view that one an order is duly implemented, acted upon and valuable right of salary and appointment accrued in favour of the civil servants then it is not within the powers of the Government to rescind or withdraw such orders."
It was further observed:- "That the selection grade to the present appellants were granted on a formula criterion as decided by the Government, hence they were awarded selection grade on the criterion laid down by the Government in the year 1982. If there was some latter decision by the Government for the grant of selection grade on the basis of the combined seniority, then such a latter decision cannot take away vested rights of appellants which were given to them under valid decision of the Government and orders of the competent authority,"
8. In the light of the above, I am of the considered opinion that the appeal of the appellants is liable to succeed in view of the judgment of this Tribunal mentioned in the earlier part of my judgment, delivered on this issue and which is still in field.
9. Resultantly the appeal is accepted, impugned orders are set aside and orders, dated 15-1-1983 and 15-3-1983, are restored. There will be no orer as to costs.
A.E.