S. ABDUL JABBAR KHAN (CHAIRMAN).--Messrs Kamaluddin and 30 others, all Readers of Lahore High Court, Lahore, have filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, against the order of respondent No. 1 granting N.P.S. 12 to the appellants w.e.f. 22-6-1981. The appellants have impleaded the Province of Punjab through Secretary Finance Government of the Punjab and Government of the Punjab through Secretary, Services, General Administration and Information Department, Civil Secretariat, Lahore as respondents.
2. By virtue of this appeal it has been prayed that the impugned order be set aside and the appellants be upgraded to N.P.S. 16 since 1972.
3. Brief facts of the case are that before introduction of National Pay Scales in 1972, the Readers of their Lordship the Chief Justice and Judges of the High Court were enjoying the Pay Scale of Rs.275- 600 and the Judgment-Writers were receiving their Salaries in the pay scale of Rs.285-500. On the introduction of National Pay Scales in 1972, both the categories of the employees of the High Court were placed in N.P.S. 11. With effect from 2-12-1975, the Judgment-Writers serving in the High Court were placed in N.P.S. 14. The other category of Stenographer designated as Private Secretaries to the Chief Justice and Judges of the Lahore High Court were upgraded from N.P.S.-11 to N . P . S . 16, w.e.f. 17-10-1974. The appellants have been agitating for their upgradation from N.P.S. 11 to N.P.S. 16 since 1972 and in this connection the High Court recommended their case to the Provincial Government on 3rd May, 1981. The Provincial Government as well which is respondent No. 2 in this case through a D.O. Letter No. S.0. (CAB)-111-1-15/76, dated 16-5-1981 recommended for the upgradation of the appellants from N . P . S . I l to N . P . S.16.However, it seems that both the recommendations were not acceded to and respondent No. 1 through Notification No. FD-PC-14- 15/78, dated 27-6-1981, only allowed to the appellants N.P.S. 12 and that too from 22-6-1981. Hence, this appeal.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned District Attorney assisted by the representatives of the Department and have perused the record of this case carefully with their assistance. It has been submitted on behalf of the appellants that as the Readers to their Lordships Chief Justice and Judges of the Lahore High Court were receiving salary in higher pay scale than their colleagues in the High Court, it was unfair and unjust to place them alongwith those who were receiving lower salaries in N.P.S. 11. It was argued that although N.P.S. 11 in which the Judgment-Writers were working was further upgraded to N.P.S. 14, but, the appellants remained where they were. Learned counsel for the appellants has further pointed out that Judgment-Writers were selected as Private Secretaries and were upgraded to N.P.S. 16 alongwith four advance increments which they were able to secure from this Tribunal through the acceptance of their appeal, whereas the case of the appellants was ignored and they were not brought at par with their said colleagues. In this connection when comparing the merits of Private Secretaries case learned counsel pointed out to a glaring anomaly which existed vis-a-vis to the Readers of the Members, Board of Revenue and the appellants. Who were enjoying higher status being attached as Readers to the Judges of the High Court who were, without any dispute, holding a post much higher than that of Member, Board of Revenue. While elaborating his point of view learned counsel has submitted that the post of Readers to the Judges of the High Court is positively on higher pedestal in terms of level of responsibilities and physical performance of duties as compared to the post of Reader to the Member, Board of Revenue. He recounted the qualifications of the appellants as well as various tests which they had to go through and made a grievance that it would be an act of great injustice if the status in the N.P.S. Of the Readers of Lahore High Court is not brought at par.
5: On the other hand learned District Attorney has adopted the concepts submitted by the Under Secretary (PC) Government of the Punjab, Finance Department, on behalf of the respondents and has submitted that as the appellants are not contesting the case of the Private Secretaries and Judgment-Writers of the Lahore High Court, he would not like to offer his comments on the merits of the said functionaries but with regard to the Readers of the Members, Board of Revenue he would submit that the said posts were filled in by transfer from among Tehsildar, who were already holding N.P.S. 16 or by promotion from Naib-Tehsildar in N . P . S . 9 and Assistants in N . P . S . 10 or the Head Vernacular Clerk in N.P.S. 10, therefore, the grievance of the appellant was ill-founded.
According to the learned D. A. The Readers of the High Court were promoted from amongst the Assistant N . P. S. 10 and Translators in N . P. S . 7, therefore, raise in their pay scales to N.P.S.12 was clearly inequitable.
6. We have given our anxious thought to the arguments raised by the parties in support of their claims and have perused the record of this case carefully with their assistance. It is on the record that vide Annexure-A a Letter No. 4424-S/V.D. 4(3)(3/B), dated 3-5-1981, from Registrar, Lahore High Court to the A.C.S. Government of Punjab, the Lahore High Court brought to the notice of A.C.S. To Government of the Punjab, Lahore, certain facts and figures to show that the case of the appellants was a justified case for upgradation in N.P.S. 16. In this letter it was pointed out that during the discussions between the Chief Justice and Chief Secretary, Government of the Punjab, the C.S. Had agreed that in case the High Court could surrender the grade of Private Secretaries the Government would have no hesitation in allowing N.P.S. 16 to the Readers of the High Court. This condition was visualised under a wrong impression that Member, Board of Revenue were only assisted by the Readers and had not the benefit of Private Secretary, or a Personal Assistant when an enquiry was made from the Secretary, Board of Revenue by the High Court, it was found that Member, Board of Revenue was assisted by the following staff:-
(1) Private Secretary: N.P.S. 16. ,
(2) Personal Assistant: N.P.S. 14 Plus Rs.50/S.P.
(3) Reader: N.P.S. 16.
In view of the above the Registrar, Lahore High Court conveyed to the A.C.S. That the Chief Justice had strongly recommended that the post of Reader of Lahore High Court, be upgraded to N.P.S. 16 as the status of the Judges to which they were attached, was much higher than the status of Member, Board of Revenue and the duties involved in case of the Readers of Lahore High Court were of much more complicated and arduous in nature than the duties performed by the Reader of the Members Board of Revenue. There is also on the record a letter from Mr. Shafqat Ezdi Shah, Additional Secretary (I a C) to Mr. Khalid Javed, Secretary Finance Punjab, in which it was conceded that the status of the High Court Judges was much higher than that of M.B.R. And the duties being identical it was unfair to deprive the Readers of the Lahore High Court from the pay scales of 'A their counter-parts in M.B.R. The Additional Secretary (I & C) laid a great stress for the removal of this disparity and complained that the disparity in the status between the Readers of High Court to that of the Readers of M.B.R. Was not being removed. It was ultimately requested that Finance Department should look into the matter personally and upgrade the posts of Readers of Lahore High Court from N.P.S. 11 to N.P.S. 16.
7. We have looked into the impugned notification and find that N.P.S. 11 of the appellants was upgraded to N.P.S. 12 without assigning any reason as to why two recommendations, one made by the Chief Justice of Lahore High Court and other by the Additional Secretary (I & C), S & GAD, were turned down. It is a matter of common knowledge to those who had worked on the High Court side that the Readers of the High Court are to be coversant with the following before they are inducted into the said posts:- (a)English Essay.
(b)Translation from Urdu to English and vice versa.
(c)High Court Rules and Orders, Volume 1, Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 12, 14, 15, 20, 21, and 22. Volume II, Chapter 4.
Volume III, Chapters 1 to 8, 11 to 15, 19, 24 and 31. Volume IV Chapter 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 16 and 18.
Volume V, whole excluding chapters 6 and 10.
(d)Court Fee Act, Stamp Act and Registration Act.
(e)Civil Procedure Code.
(f)Preliminary Chapter, Part. II, Parts IV and XI. Schedule I, Orders, I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, XIII, XVIII, XXI, XXII, XXXII, XXXIII, XXXIV, XXXIX, XL, XLI, XLII, XLIII, DLIG, DLV, DLVI and XLVIII.
(g)Evidence Act.
(h)Pakistan Penal Code.
Chapters I to IV, XIII, IX to XII, XI, XVII and XX.
(i)Criminal Procedure Code.
Chapters 11 to VIII, XII, XIV to XLV.
A person with these qualifications has to further combat with heavy work which a Judge of the High Court requires to do. Detail of such work is as under:-
(1) To collect Peshi and arrange the same; find out if the case is otherwise complete in so far as the service of process of the Court on the parties is concerned;
(2) To study the cases and find out under what enactment /status the case hinges;
(3) To arrange and collect law reports and text books likely to be cited, discussed and referred to during the course of arguments.
(4) To assist the Court during hearing with attentive vigilance and also prepare a brief resume of facts so as to compare orders/ judgments and law reports to obviate the possibility of any factual mistake occurring and also to verify the judgments with reference to the law reports referred to therein; and.
(5) To assist the Honourable Judges during the course of inspection of Subordinate Courts;besides being present in Court 15/20 minutes earlier than the arrival of the Hon'ble Judge and leave late till in the evening.
8. Similarly, there can be no dispute about the fact that the M.B.R. Is only required to do the cases of one category i.e. Land Revenue Act, Colonies Act or Consolidation Act and for that matter none of the Members combines in himself all those powers under the said Acts and only deal separately with distinctive designation i.e. Member (Colonies), Member (Consolidation) and Member (Revenue). In this manner the work handled by the Readers of the Lahore High Court is of great magnitude as compared to the work handled by the Readers of the Board of Revenue. The only point of some value initially, raised by the learned counsel for the respondents before us was that the Readers attached to the Members B.O.R. Were basically holding N.P.S. 16 as being Tehsildars.
When this point was probed further, it came to light that Tehsildars when appointed as Readers were allowed an extra pay of Rs.60 but all the Readers were not Tehsildars and as claimed in para- wise comments by the respondents and were persons upgraded from the post of Naib-Tehsildars in N.P.S. 9 or Assistants in N.P.S. 10 or Head Vernacular Clerks N.P.S 10. We have also looked into the scheme by which the persons were High Court and find that they were also promoted from among Assistants N.P.S.10.Even keeping the comparison in view, we cannot remain oblivious of the fact that every Assistant or Translator cannot, by virtue of his promotion, become Reader to a Judge of the Lahore High Court unless and until goes through the test and the knowledge which he has to acquire regarding C.P.C. Cr.P.C., Registration Act and other books as mentioned above in the earlier part of our judgment and unless it is found that his knowledge in the said Laws and Rules is upto the mark, he cannot be allowed to sit with the Judge of the High Court and assist him as a Reader in his daily work.
9. We also cannot ignore a glaring fact that the Readers of the Supreme Court which is Appellate Court of the High Court are always placed in higher National Pay Scales than those of the subordinate Courts to the Supreme Court. In this manner, we cannot repel with any force, the point raised by the appellants that the High Court is Appellate Court for Board of Revenue and that all the matters of all the Courts in the country (except by virtue of Constitutional provisions where jurisdiction is so barred, for example the Service Tribunal is not the subject of jurisdiction of the Lahore High Court are adjudicated at this level. It may also be pointed out at this stage that in fact the promotion to the post of Reader to the Lahore High Court is subject to qualifying written test or stop-gap arrangements from among Assistants in N.P.S. 14 and 20 selection grade of Assistants in N.P.S_ 11 and Senior Translators in N.P.S. 11.
10. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned notification has in no way fulfilled the requirements and the recommendations as envisaged in the two letters one from Chief Justice and other from S a GAD itself and has, without any justification passed an order to the detriment of the appellants. The result is, we set C aside the above notification and accept the appeal and direct that the post of Reader of the High Court be upgraded to N.P.S. 16 to bring them at par at least with the Readers of the Members Board of Revenue.
However, there will be no order as to costs. Decision to be communicated to the parties on the given address.