' SYED ALLY MADAD SHAH (CHAIRMAN).---Appellant Mr. Nayyar Iqbal was appointed as a Junior Engineer (B-17) in WAPDA with effect from 23-9-1984, after having obtained Diploma in Electrical Engineering from Tashkent Polytechnical Institute in USSR. In the year 1987, he happened to know that three officers, namely M/s. Saleem Akhtar, Syed Mustafa Ashraf and AmjadAli holding the same Diploma and serving in different Organisations were allowed four advance increments. He made representation to his authorities for treating him alike and giving him four advance increments. His case was recommended to the Chairman, WAPDA, Lahore, who referred it to the Ministry of Water and Power. The Ministry of Water and Power obtained advice of the Finance Division. The Finance Division agreed to the grant of four advance increments to the appellant.
However, the appellant was not allowed the advance increments. He preferred appeal to the Chairman, WAPDA, but did not get any response. He therefore, preferred this appeal on 8-3-1990 for grant of four advance increments.
2. The respondents have not filed written objections. However, Mr. Tanvir' Bashir Ansari, Advocate has appeared on their behalf and resisted the appeal. He has contended that the appeal is not maintainable as it is not directed against any order, original or appellate, and it is hit by the provisions of subsection (1) of section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973. He has further contended that the appeal is time-barred as well. He has also contended that the appellant has no case on merits, as the Diploma obtained by him from Tashkent Polytechnical Institute, USSR, is not equivalent to the Degree of M.Sc. In Pakistan and, therefore, he does not possess the requisite qualifications for claiming four advance increments.
3. As regards .The legal objections put forth by the learned counsel for the respondents, the question of maintainability of the appeal is dealt with first. The case of the appellant is that he happened to know in the year 1987 that three Assistant Engineers (B-17) serving in other organisations, holding similar degrees from USSR, were granted four advance increments and he, therefore, made representation to the departmental authorities for allowing him four advance increments likewise. He has not filed a copy of the application/representation nor has he mentioned its date in the memo. Of appeal but he has made its mention in the application/appeal he had made to the Chairman, WAPDA, Lahore on 20-11-1989. He has given its number and date as "Dy. No, 2452 of 7th January, 1988". In any case, it is not disputed that the appellant did agitate the matter for grant of four advance increments on recognition of the Degree of Masters in Sciences in Engineering obtained by him from the. State Examination Commission of the USSR. His case was actually referred to the Ministry of Water and Power by the Managing Director (Power), WAPDA, Lahore under letter dated 5-9-1988, a photostat copy whereof has been filed as Annexure 'H' at page 22 of the memo. Of appeal. The matter was referred to the Finance Division and a reply was received by the Ministry of Water and Power vide Finance Division Office Memorandum dated 12-1- 1989 that the Finance Division had agreed to allow four advance increments to the appellant' from the date of his entry into BPS-17. A photostat copy of the letter is Annexure 'J' at page 24. During the course of inter-departmental correspondence, the appellant was endorsed, under Managing Director (Power) WAPDA letter dated 23-7-1989 addressed to the Chairman, Area Electricity Board, WAPDA, Islamabad, a copy of Pakistan Engineering Council letter No, PEC/04, dated 28-5-1989 addressed to the Ministry of Water and Power, to the effect that the Pakistan Engineering Council had equated the Diploma of the M.Sc. From USSR with B.Sc. Engineering as notified vide SP() No, 833(1)/88, dated 21-9-1988. A copy of the same was also forwarded to him under endorsement dated 28-8-1989 from the office of the Chairman, Area Electricity Board, WAPDA, Islamabad. These documents have been filed at the. Hearing of the appeal. The learned counsel for the appellant has urged that the communication dated 28-8-1989 of the letter of Pakistan Engineering Council dated 28-5-1989 amounted to rejection of the representation of the appellant for grant of advance increments. He has further urged that the appellant then made an application dated 20-11-1989 to the Chairman, WAPDA, Lahore for the aforesaid relief and it amounted to departmental appeal. The application has been filed as Annexure 'K' at page 25. This appeal was filed thereafter on 8-3-1990.
The communication to the appellant of the copy of letter of the Pakistan Engineering Council that the Degree of Diploma of M.Sc. From USSR was treated' by the Council equivalent to B.Sc.
Engineering tantamounted to the intimation to him that his representation for advance increments on the basis of Degree in M.Sc. From USSR stood turned down. The application by the appellant to the Chairman, WAPDA, on 20-11-1989 amounted to departmental representation/appeal. Of course, there are some deficiencies in the memo. Of appeal that no specific mention of these documents has been made therein. It may be pointed out that authenticity of these documents was not questioned by the learned counsel for the respondents. Thus, there has been substantial compliance of the provisions of subsection (1) of section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973 as regards the maintainability of appeal and it does not suffer from non-maintainability on that score.
4. The second objection to the maintainability of the appeal is on the question of limitation. It would appear from the events mentioned above that the appellant made a representation dated 7-1- 1988 for grant of four advance increments on account of his post-graduate qualifications. The matter was actually processed departmentally and was referred to the Finance Division. The decision of the Finance Division was in favour of the appellant but it was not given effect to, nor was a copy of the decision endorsed to the appellant. It was only on 28-8-1989 that a copy of the letter of the Pakistan Engineering Council was endorsed to the appellant conveying that the Master's Degree in Engineering obtained by him from USSR was not equivalent to M.Sc. In Engineering as to have entitled him to get advance increments. The appellant made application/ representation to the Chairman, WAPDA on 20-11-1989. There was some gap between the letter dated 28-8-1989 whereunder the appellant was conveyed the opinion of the Pakistan Engineering Council and the making of the appeal/representation to the Chairman, WAPDA, on 20-11-1989, but the appellant has stated in his condonation application that he came to know about the opinion of the Finance Division only in November 1989 and he then made appeal to the Chairman, WAPDA during the course of the same month. The appeal/representation was made to the Chairman, WAPDA, on 20- 11-1989 and there was no response to his appeal/representation and this appeal, having been filed on 8-3-1990, Was within the period of limitation of 120 days inclusive of the period of 90 days required for awaiting decision of the departmental appeal. The appeal is, therefore, held to be within the period of limitation.
5. The appellant claims four advance increments on the basis of Diploma Degree conferred on him by the State Examination Commission of USSR, a A photostat copy whereof has been filed as Annexure 'B'. It is dated 18th June, 1983 and is reproduced below: "UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS DIPLOMA NO. 049596 ' This is to certify that Nayyar lqbal s/o Malik Aman was admitted in 1978 to the Tashkent Polytechnical Institute, named after Beruni and in 1983 completed the full course of the abovementioned Institute having specialised in Electrical System and Networks.
' By the Resolution of the State Examination Commission of the 16th of June, 1983, he/she is qualified as Electrical Engineer.
' By the special decision of the State Examination Commission the Degree of Master of Science in Engineering is conferred on Nayyar lqbal son of Malik Aman.
' He/she is entitled by this Diploma to carry out independent work of any kind connected with the abovementioned qualification and specialisation. SEAL OF THE STATE EXAMINATION COMMISSION.
(Sd.)
RECTOR DEAN OF THE FACULTY Tashkent, the 18th of June, 1983.
Regd. No, 1187 db."
According to the appellant, this Degree is equivalent to the Degree of Master of Sciences in Engineering in Pakistan and he has placed reliance on the protocol entered between the Islamic Republic of Pakistan with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the equivalency of documents and certificate degree of 4th June, 1979, a photostat copy whereof has been filed as Annexure 'C' to the memo. Of appeal, and also on the Certificate from the University Grants Commission dated 27- 7-1983 on the subject, a photostat copy whereof has been filed as Annexure 'D'. He has also filed a copy of the Certificate of Registration under the Pakistan Engineering Council Act, 1975 of his registration as professional engineer on the basis of the aforesaid Diploma Degree. He has also placed on record a photostat copy of a letter dated 5-9-1988 addressed to the Secretary, Ministry of Water and Power from the Chief Engineer (Admn.), Power, WAPDA, Lahore, recommending the case of the appellant for obtaining opinion of the Ministry of Finance as well as Pakistan Engineering Council for advice. It is Annexure 'H' to the memo. Of appeal. He has also filed a photostat copy of Office Memorandum dated 12-1-1989 of the Ministry of Finance (Annexure agreeing that the appellant may be allowed four advance increments on the basis of the M.Sc.
Electrical Engineering Degree obtained by him from Tashkent Polytechnical Institute, USSR. Some more documents have been filed at the hearing of the appeal and they would be referred to hereinafter whenever necessary. As stated above, the respondents have not filed any written objections but the learned counsel appearing on their behalf availing of the production of certain documents by the learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the University Grants Commission was not competent to have certified the equivalence of the Diploma Degree obtained by the appellant from USSR but that question was to be determined by the Pakistan Engineering Council established under the Pakistan Engineering Council Act, 1975, and the Council had ruled out that the degree obtained by the appellant was equivalent to B.Sc. Engineering degree in the relevant field in Pakistan and, therefore, the appellant was not entitled to claim advance increments.
6. The diploma degree obtained by the appellant from Tashkent Polytechnical Institute, USSR has been reproduced above. It clearly cites that the appellant was conferred the degree of Master of Science in Engineering by the State Examination Commission. Its equivalence in Pakistan is to be considered in accordance with the protocol between the two Governments, i,e, Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) entered into on 4-6-1979, a photostat copy whereof has been filed as Annexure 'C'. The learned counsel for the appellant has made pertinent. Reference to clause 4 of the Protocol which reads as under: "Diplomas, issued in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics after successful graduation from a higher educational establishment and after passing state examinations or defending a graduation paper and diplomas, issued in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan after graduation from higher educational establishment certifying the receipt by their owners of the degree of Master of Sciences (Arts), arc equivalent and when applying for work are recognised in both countries in accordance with the degree and qualification, stipulated in these diplomas."
It would appear that the degree of Master of Science in Engineering obtained by the appellant from Tashkent Polytechnical Institute, USSR is equivalent to the degree of Master of Sciences in Engineering in the case of the appellant, as per Protocol between the two countries, referred to above. The University Grants Commission also certified likewise. Of course, the Pakistan Engineering Council have notified their decision under SP() 833(1)/88, dated 21-9-1988, that the degree of M.Sc.
From USSR was equivalent to B.Sc. Engineering for the purpose of registration under the Pakistan Engineering Council Act as a professional engineer and reference was made to the corrigendum issued by the University Grants Commission to the effect that the diploma in Engineering from USSR was equivalent to B.Sc. Engineering Degree in the relevant field in Pakistan. Reference was also made to the decision of the High Court of Sindh in the Constitutional Petition No, D-1710 of 1987 holding that the Pakistan Engineering Council was the appropriate authority to determine the equivalence of the diploma obtained from USSR. Be that as it may, the decision of equivalence has to be taken in accordance with the Protocol established by the two countries and it appears from clause 4 of the Protocol, referred to above, that the Diploma in Post-Graduate Sciences conferred by Tashkent Polytechnical Institute, USSR would be recognised as a degree of Master of Science in the relevant field in Pakistan and the Pakistan Engineering Council would not be competent to impose its own interpretation on the equivalence of the degrees regulated by the Protocol entered into by the two countries. Thus, there does not seem any doubt that the diploma of degree of Master of Science in Engineering conferred on the appellant by the State Examination Commission in the USSR is equivalent to the degree of Master of Science in Engineering in Pakistan. The power vested in the Pakistan Engineering Council under section 11 of the Pakistan Engineering Council Act, 1975 for recognition of engineering qualifications of Universities outside the country is only for the purpose of its jurisdiction/authority under the said Act. Of course, there is mention in the letter of the Pakistan Engineering Council dated 28-5-1989, addressed to the Ministry of Water and Power, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad, and another letter dated 22-2-1990 addressed to the Deputy Director (Admn.-I), WAPDA, WAPDA House, Lahore of a decision of the Sindh High Court in Petition No, D-1710 of 1987. No copy of the judgment has been made available by the respondents. As mentioned above, the Pakistan Engineering Council does have jurisdiction/authority under section 11 of the aforesaid Act of determining equivalency of the foreign degrees in Engineering Sciences but that is only within the sphere of the powers of the Pakistan Engineering Council under the Act which are specified under section 8 thereof. Moreover, the determination of equivalence of the foreign degree in Master of Sciences has to be regulated in accordance with the Protocol entered into by the two Governments and even the Pakistan Engineering Council is bound to give effect to the Protocol. It is, therefore, held that the diploma of degree of Master of Science in Engineering obtained by the appellant from USSR is equivalent to the degree of Master of Sciences in Engineering in Pakistan.
7. The appellant has filed at the hearing of appeal a photostat copy of Office Memorandum No, F.O.
B&F/10-126/BSP387/25401-25651, dated 19-7-1989 of the WAPDA on the subject "Revision of Basic Pay Scales of WAPDA Employees", which contains a provision in paragraph 6 for grant of advance increments to its employees for possessing/attaining higher equivalent qualifications. Paragraph 6 is sub-divided in three clauses (a), (b) and (c). Clause (a) provides for advance increments to the employees in BPS-1 to BPS-15. Its clause (b) provides that engineers and doctors shall be allowed four advance increments in case they possess or acquire a Post-Graduate Degree in their relevant field for which they have not been allowed any qualification pay/allowance. Its clause (c) provides that advance increments shall be allowed at the time of recruitment or acquiring higher qualification during service. It follows that the appellant is entitled to the benefit of four advance increments admissible under the said Office Memorandum. He possessed the degree in M.Sc.
Engineering at the time of his recruitment in service. However;the benefits provided under the said Office Memorandum are effective from the 1st of July, 1987. The appellant shall, therefore, be entitled to the benefit of four advance increments from that date viz. 1-7-1987 and not from any earlier date.
8. For the reasons recorded above, the appeal is allowed to the extent that the appellant shall be paid four advance increments with effect from 1-7-1987 for having Post-Graduate Degree viz. Master of Science in Engineering. No order is I made for costs.