' CH. ABDUL RASHID (MEMBER).--This is an appeal filed by Mr. Babu Khan, Deputy Director (Retired) for ante-dating his promotion as Senior Officer (Administration) in NPS-18 with effect from 29-1- 1977 instead of 7-6-1978. He has made the WAPDA through General Manager (Administration), WAPDA, Lahore as respondent No, 1 and Secretary, Irrigation and Power, Punjab Government as respondent No,
2. The appeal was filed on 13-3-1986 and admitted to regular hearing on 10-9-1986.
The respondent No, 1 has contested the same. The respondent No, 2 neither filed written statement nor contested the case.
2. The learned counsel for the respondent No, 1 has raised the point that the appeal is barred by limitation. We have examined the point. The appellant earlier filed appeal No, 203 of 1984 before this Tribunal on 10-3-1984 against th impugned order dated 27-2-1984 which was within time. This Tribunal dismissed the appeal vide order dated 29-3-1984 for lack of jurisdiction as it was of the view that the appeal was competent before Federal Service Tribunal. The view was based on the erroneous assumption that the appellant was WAPDA employee. The appeal before that Tribunal was instituted on 31-3-1984. It was heard on 2-3-1986. The relevant portion of their judgment of the same date is reproduced below:-- "The learned counsel for respondent WAPDA has raised a preliminary objection that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeals. It is admitted that both the appellants were originally employees of the Electricity Department of the Province and they were taken in WAPDA service under first proviso to section 17 of the WAPDA Act, 1958. Subsequently, on the dissolution of the Province of West Pakistan, under Employees of the Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority (Allocation to Provinces) Order, 1979 (P.O. -24 of 1979), they were allocated to the Provinces where they were serving at the time of creation of the Province of West Pakistan or the Provinces of their permanent residences. Their service with the WAPDA in such circumstances was a service on deputation. Section 17(1-B) of the WAPDA Act which gives jurisdiction to the Tribunal in respect of employees of WAPDA excludes jurisdiction in respect of the persons on deputation. The specific point had come up before the Supreme Court in the case of Jahanzeb Khan v. WAPDA 1981 SCMR 1178, and it was held therein that Jahanzeb who was originally an employee of N.-W.F.P.
Electricity Department could not invoke the jurisdiction of the Federal Service Tribunal and his remedy lay in filing appeal with the N.-W.F.P. Service Tribunal."
"The learned counsel for the appellant has, however, argued that both the appellants had approached the Punjab Service Tribunal, but that Tribunal declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that their appeals lie to the Federal Service Tribunal. It may be pointed out that the said appeal was dismissed in limine and the case of Jahanzeb Khan was not brought to the notice of the Punjab Service Tribunal, nor attention was drawn to the provisions of P.O. No, 24 of 1979."
"For the reasons stated above, we hold that the appellants are not civil servants amenable to our jurisdiction and this Tribunal cannot entertain their appeals, which are dismissed with no order as to costs."
The present appeal was filed on 13-3-1986. We have given allowance for the time taken before this Tribunal previously and before the Federal Service Tribunal. This appeal was, therefore, admitted to regular hearing and time extended in the ends of justice.
4. The facts of the case arc that the appellant was promoted as Junior facer (Administration) on 7- 6-1971. He was posted as Senior Officer dministration) which is a post in scale 18 in his own pay scale of Junior Officer administration) (a post in scale 16) vide order dated 21-1-1977. He was given gulag promotion to the post of Deputy Director (Administration) from 7-6-1978 de order dated 5-3- 1983.
5. The appellant requests for promotion as Deputy Director with effect on 29-1-1977, the date on which he started performing the duties of this post. e counsel for the appellant has argued that the relevant Rules and order governing the case were:--
(a) West Pakistan WAPDA (Power Wing) Senior and Junior Officers (Non-Technical) Service Rules, 1968, and
(b) Office order dated 31-5-1976.
' According to (a) above, the post of Senior Officer (Administration) is reserved 100% by promotion and the 'minimum length of service prescribed in the lower post for regular promotion to the higher post' is "7 years service as a Junior Officer". While according to the office order at (b), above "minimum length of ervice for eligibility for promotion to various grades as prescribed under the elevant service Rules" was to be determined in the following manner:- "(1) In the case of the senior most officer to be promoted to Grade-18, half of the service in Grade-16 and one fourth in grades lower than 16 (formerly known as non-Gaietted), if any, may be counted as service in Grade-17". ' has been contended that the appellant had seven years service in scale 17 on 9-1-1977 as calculated below:-- {{TABLWE TEXT}} (a)1/4 of service in grades Y M D lower than 16 (from 2-2-1942 to 6-6-1971) 7 4 1 (b)1/2 of service as Junior Officer (Admn.) (from 7-6-1971 to 28-1-1977)
Total: 10 1 26 {{TABLE TEXT}} ' He should, therefore, have been promoted on regular basis with effect from 29-1-1977.
6. It has been contended on behalf of the respondent No, 1 that the office order dated 31-5-1976 was amended on 29-11-1980 with immediate effect and now reads as under:-- "(1) In the case of the senior most officer to be promoted to Grade-18, service rendered in Grade-17 only shall be counted,"
' Since the promotion of the appellant was ordered on 5-3-1983 though effective from 7-6-1978, therefore the office order dated 29-11-1980 was fully applicable. The appellant was appointed as Junior Officer in Grade-16 on 7-6-1971 and on completion of seven years has rightly been given promotion from 7-6-1978.
7. The learned counsel for the appellant has quoted the precedents of Mr. Amanullah Beg and Mr. Shafiq Ahmad who were given the scale of the post o Senior Officer (Administration) on the basis of above computation vide order dated 10-9-1976 and 23-12-1976 respectively. The respondents have not denie these but have stated that these orders were issued prior to the amendment dated 29- 11-1980. They have also taken the plea that his senior, Mr. Muhammad Younis, was not allowed benefit of this computation and was promoted to BPS-18 with effect from 1-3-1977 after completion of seven years' service as Junior Officer (Admn.). It has further been submitted that none of the juniors of the appellant has been promoted from a date earlier than his.
8. The learned counsel for the respondent No, 1 has taken the objection that the Punjab Service Tribunal has no jurisdiction in this case because of the following provision of Punjab Service Tribunals Act of 1974:-- "Section 4(1) "Provided that-- (a)
(b) no appeal shall lie to a Tribunal against an order or decision of a departmental authority determining the fitness or otherwise of a person to be appointed to or hold a particular post or to be promoted to a higher grade; ' We have examined the point. The appellant enjoyed the status, rights and liabilities of the post of Senior Officer (Admn.), except pay scale. The only benefit denied to him was grant of scale 18 and increments therein. It is, strictly speaking, not a case of ante-dating promotion. The real question in this case, in our view, is whether or not the appellant, even though not promoted, was entitled to NPS-18 with effect from 29-1-1977 and increments accruing therein from time to time. He had more than seven years' service in BPS-17 on 29-1-1977 as computed in accordance with office order dated 31-5-1976. This order dated 31-5-1976 held the field in 1977. This order was withdrawn on 29- 11-1980. He has already been granted promotion with effect from 7-6-1978. The stand of respondent No 1 that in the cases referred to in para. 7 above, the orders were passed before 29-11-1980 and in the present case promotion order was passed on 5-3-1983 i,e,, after 29-11-1980 is of no consequence as the position has to be seen on the relevant date which is 29-1-1977. We find that he was required to perform the duties of the higher post. Under the Civil Servants Act he was entitled to the pay of the higher post with effect from 29-1-1977. He was also entitled to count his service in NPS-18 towards increments in that scale because he did not suffer from any ineligibility or deficiency. In holding the above views we are fortified by the judgment of the Supreme Court reported as 1986 SCM R 991.
9. The upshot of the above discussion is that the appeal for ante-dating promotion fails. We, however, order that the appellant shall be allowed BPS-18 with effect from 29-1-1977 and also the increments in that scale as falling due from time to time under the relevant Pay Rules. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.