' AJMAL MIAN, J.---By this common order we intend to dispose of the above petitions which are directed against the common judgment of the learned Federal Service Tribunal, hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal, passed in Appeal No, 196(L)/90 and other Appeals Nos. 120, 183, 214, 215, 248(L)/89 and 33, 196 and 217(L)/90 filed by the petitioners in the above first six petitions, which were allowed partly. Petitions Nos. 522(L) of 1993 to 527(L) of 1993 have been filed by the employees of the Pakistan Railways who were appellants in the above appeals as stated hereinabove, whereas Civil Petitions Nos. 536(L) of 1993 to 541(L) of 1993 have been filed by the Railway authority.
2. The above private respondents had raised two controversies in the above appeals, namely, as to the date of fixation of their salaries in selection grade 16 and claim for special pay. There was difference of opinion between the two Members of the Tribunal. The matter was referred to the learned Chairman who decided as follows:-- " I have the privilege of going through both the judgment's proposed by my learned brothers. In these appeals, two points are: (1) whether selection grade is a promotion; and (2) whether the appellants are entitled to special pay of Rs,75 per month.
' The view of Mr. Rana Rifat Saeed is that those who were given selection grade cannot be considered as to have been promoted and the appeals fail for that relief; but for the second relief he has held that the appellants are entitled to special pay of Rs,75 per month. The other learned Member Ch. Hasan Nawaz has taken a different view with regard to selection grade and reliance has been placed on the case reported in 1991 SCM R 6%, wherein it has been held that `whatever there is a change of grade or post for the better, there is an element of selection involved that is promotion and it is not earned automatically but under an order of the competent authority to be passed after due consideration on the comparative suitability and the entitlement of those incompetent'. I, therefore, fully agree with the findings of my learned brother Ch. Hasan Nawaz on both points. The result is that Appeals Nos. 1%(L)/90, 183(L)/89, 248(L)/89, 33(L)/90 and 214(L)/89 are allowed as regards the first relief and dismissed for the second relief. Appeal No, 120(L)/89 is dismissed as time-barred."
3. Mr. S. Inayat Hussain, learned counsel for the private petitioners, has contended that the petitioners were entitled to the special pay, which has been denied to them illegally. He further submitted that the impugned judgment as to the date of fixation of the pay for the above selection grade is in consonance with law.
4. Whereas, Mr. Fazal-i-Hussain, learned Advocate-on-Record for the Railway Authorities, has urged that the special pay was abolished several years back and that above action of the Railway Authorities stands affirmed by this Court as some of the appeals/petitions have been dismissed in respect thereof. As regards the fixation of pay or the selection grade, his submission is that the Finance Department is the competent authority under the relevant rules to fix the date which has been done through its Memo. No, F.6(13) Imp. 11/91 dated 3-6-1992 received under Railway Board's letter No,E.IV/92-PC/1 dated 9-6-1992. However, he candidly conceded that the above memo. Was not placed before the Tribunal.
5. In our view the impugned judgment seems to be just and proper. The case does not involve any substantial question of law of public importance in terms of clause 3 of Article 212 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
' Leave is accordingly refused.