MIAN FAIZ KARIM (MEMBER).--Mrs. Farhat Shaheen Akram, Deputy Directoress of Education, Sargodha Division, has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunal Act, 1974 against the order of the Government contained in the Notification No.S.O(SE)-1--33/84, dated 30- 9-1985 with a grievance that the appellant has been granted move over from B.P.S.-18 to B.P.S.-19 with effect from 1-12-1984 instead of 1-5-1977 under the Government of the Punjab, Education Department Notification No. S.O.(SE)-1-3-74, dated 25-7-1974. The appellant has impleaded the Government of the Punjab through Secretary Education, as respondent.
2. Through this appeal the appellant has prayed that the appellant be declared to have been granted B.P.S.-19 w.e.f. 1-5-1977 instead of 1-12-1984.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was previously the Headmistress of Municipal Girls High School, Block No. 26/27, Sargodha, which was transferred to the Education Department vide Notification No. S.O.VI(L-G) 4-(4)/72, dated 27-8-1975. According to terms of her transfer her previous service was to be counted for purpose of pension, seniority etc. The appellant was allowed move over to B.P.S.-19 w.e.f. 1-12-1984 but the appellant felt that she should have been granted the move over from 1-5-1977. The appellant filed Appeal No. 848 of 1984 before the Punjab Service Tribunal which was disposed of as premature because the representation of the appellant was yet pending before the Secretary Education. The appellant filed a separate Appeal No. 735/85 regarding date of her promotion to B.P.S.-18. Hence this appeal.
4. Before the case could be admitted to regular hearing a report (comments) from the respondent was obtained and the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and learned District Attorney for the respondent were also heard.
5. At the time of the arguments learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant was working as Headmistress in the M.C. Girls High School of Sargodha before the nationalization of the school and transfer of her service to the Education Department. Learned counsel for the appellant added that the appellant was in the B.P.S.-18 at the time of transfer of her service. The learned counsel for the appellant further stated that the Secretary Education granted her move over to B.P.S.-19 w.e.f. 1-12-1984, which should have been actually 1-5-1977. The learned counsel for the appellant concluded his arguments while stating that the terms and conditions of the transfer of her services to the Provincial Government have not been implemented.
6. The learned District Attorney opposed the appeal and stated that the staff of the M.C. High School was not given any guarantee of seniority in the Notification, dated- 30-11-75. The learned District Attorney added that the staff so transferred was not given any guarantee to count their seniority from the date of their induction in the Local Council School. The learned District Attorney further stated that the appellant was not in B.P.S.-18 at the time of her transfer to the Education Department rather she was in the selection grade in the scale of Rs.750-1,500. The learned District Attorney also stated that B.P.S.-19 was allowed to the officers of school cadre who were drawing pay in Revised Consolidated Pay Scale of Rs.875-75-1,700 as personal to them. The learned District Attorney closed his arguments while stating that the appellant was granted B.P.S.-18 w.e.f. 26-8- 1985 on the availability of Grade-18 post and the move over to Grade-19 was allowed on 30-9-1985 w.e.f. 1-12-1984.
7. We have carefully considered the points so raised by learned' counsel for the appellant and learned District Attorney for the respondent. It is on the record that the appellant was never in B. P.
S.-18 at the time of the nationalization of the school and her transfer to the Education Department rather she was in the selection grade. This is also on the record that no guarantee of any seniority at par with the staff of the Education Department was given i.e. Her seniority w.e.f. The date of her employment by the Local Council (Municipal Committee). The appellant has not been able to show by production of any authentic document that she was granted B.P.S.-18 before her transfer to the A Provincial Education Department. As such there is no reason to disbelieve that she was promoted to B.P.S.-18 w.e.f. 26-8-1985 on the availability of B.P.S.-18 post, as decided in her separate Appeal No. 735 of 1985: Similarly there is no ground to interfere with the impugned orders of move over to B.P.S.-19 vide Notification, dated 30-9-1985 w.e.f . 1-12-1984.
8. Hence there is no force in the appeal, which is accordingly dismiss in limine.
No order for the cost