' MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN (MEMBER).---By an order dated 10-1-1995 certain officials were granted BPS-13 and BPS-15 and by another order dated 6-2-1995 an official has been promoted to BPS-16.
The appellant considers that these promotions have been ordered on the basis of the order of President of Pakistan circulated vide an Office Memorandum dated 1-7-1983 (hereinafter called the 0.M.) and he is aggrieved that the said O.M. Is not being implemented for grant of promotion to the appellant as Accountant BPS-16 with effect from 1-7-1983. The so-called impugned orders dated 26-1-1995 and 10-1-1995 have been challenged on 6-2-1995 by' way of representation at Annexute 'F' as per para. 7 of the appeal. After waiting for ninety days the .Appellant moved 'this Tribunal on 14-5-1995 asking that the appellant be considered for promotion to the post of Accountant BPS-16 with effect from 1-7-1983 to comply with the said O.M.
2. The respondents contested the case: Summary of the case and the parawise comments were filed and the appellant also filed reply to the parawise comments. Arguments were heard and the record has been perused.
' Since the case of the appellant is based mainly on the O.M. Dated 18-8-1983, therefore, it will be appropriate if the said O.M. Is reproduced in extenso: ' No, F. 1(1)-R3/83 ' Government of Pakistan ' Finance Division ' (Regulation Wing)
' Islamabad, the 18th August, 1993.
Office Memorandum ' Subject: Reorganization of the Junior and Senior Auditors in Audit . Department ' The undersigned is directed to state that the President has been pleased to decide the following re-organization of Audit Departments with. Effect from 1st July, 1983:--
(i) The existing cadre of Auditors may be split up into two cadres, Auditors and Senior Auditors. The cadre of Auditors may continue to be filled in by promotion of Junior Auditors on seniority-cum- fitness basis. The cadre of Senior Auditors should be filled. In by present graduate Auditors/Assistants or those non-graduate Auditors who subsequently graduate and by direct recruitment of graduates. The post of the Auditor may carry Scale B-7 while that of the Senior Auditor Scale B-11. 35% of posts of the Auditors which at present constitute a separate cadre of Audit and Accounts Assistants may continue to draw pay in B-11. One-third of the posts of Senior Auditors should have a Selection Grade in B-13.
(ii) One-third posts of Accountants will be filled by promotion from the Audit Assistants and the Senior Auditors on the basis of their seniority in B-11, while two-third will continue to be filled by such persons who pass the prescribed examination of Accountants.
(iii) Junior Auditors possessing typing speed of 30 words per minute and actually performing the duties of typist should be allowed a special pay of Rs,50 p.m. In addition to their pay in B-5.
(Sd.)
(Qamar ud Din Siddiqui), Additional Finance Secretary.
(1) Auditor-General of Pakistan, Lahore..
(2) Financial Adviser and Chief Accounts Officer, Pakistan Railways, Lahore.
(3) Military Accountant-General, Rawalpindi.
(4) Chief Accounts Officer, T&T, Islamabad.
(5) Director-General, P.P.O., Islamabad.
(6) Director-General, P.W.D., Islamabad.
(7) C.A.O.M., M/o Foreign Affairs, Islamabad."
4. The undisputed facts in this case are that the appellant joined the Office of the respondent No,2 as Auditor (B-7) on 18-8-1964 and that he was promoted to the post of Audit Assistant (B-11) on 25- 8-1967. Prior to the year 1983 there used to be the cadre of Auditors and Audit Assistants. By the said O.M. The Audit Department was ordered to be re-organized with effect from 1-7-1983 and the cadre of Auditors was decided to be split up in two cadres i,e, the cadre of the Auditors and cadre of Senior Auditors. The posts of Auditors (in BPS-7) were to be filled by promotion of Junior Auditors whereas the cadre of Senior Auditors was to be filled by promotion of Graduate Auditors, Graduate Assistants or by direct recruitment of graduates. Thirty-five per cent. Posts of the Auditors were allowed to continue as a separate cadre of Audit and Accounts Assistants in BPS-11. It was further provided that one-third posts of Accountants will be filled by promotion from Audit Assistant and the Senior Auditors on the basis of their seniority in BPS-11. The appellant demands his promotion against this quota reserved for the Audit Assistants for promotion to the post of Accountant to the extent of one-third posts thereof.
5. The perusal of the above-quoted order dated 18-8-1983 will also show that there was no provision for promotion of officials to B-15 or for promotion to non-graduate Audit and Accounts Assistants to the post of Senior Auditor nor there is any reference of grant of Selection Grade in B-13 or B-15 to the Audit Assistants or to the Auditors. The appellant has mainly based his appeal on the ground that some Audit and Accounts Assistants have been granted Selection Grade in B-13 or B- 15 in accordance with the said "O.M." whereas the other provision of the said O.M. Regarding promotion of Audit Assistants to the post of Accountant has not been complied with. The above analysis will prove that even the said promotion of Audit and Accounts 'Assistant to B-13 and B-15 is also not provided in the said O.M.. It appears that subsequent to the said O.M. Some more developments have taken place. For example the post of the Auditor has been abolished with effect from 1-4-1988, the Audit Assistants are apparently allowed selection grade, and probably by some other order the provision for promotion of non-graduate Auditors and non-graduate Audit Assistants has also been made for promotion to the post of Senior Auditor. The appellant has omitted to mention these changes. Similarly, the appellant has not mentioned that there had been two rounds of litigation earlier based on the similar prayers of his promotion from B-11 to the post of Accountant in B-16 with effect from 1-7-1983. Thus, the appeal is "not the whole truth" several developments have been avoided to be placed on the file and the main claim is based on the said O.M. For grant of promotion with effect from 1-7-1983 on the basis of "seniority in B-11". This claim cannot be considered or allowed in isolation. Other relevant factors prior to and subsequent to the said order and the decisions of the Courts will also be kept in view for deciding the claim of the appellant.
6. To recapitulate the issue it may be said that the appellant has based his appeal on two grounds:-- ' Firstly, that in compliance with the said O.M. The promotion of several officials has been notified to R-13 and B-15 and the provision relating to his promotion in the same O.M. Has been ignored; and ' Secondly, that one Mr. Muhammad Shabbir Bangash who was allegedly junior to him in the cadre of Audit Assistants but senior to him in the cadre of the Auditors, had been promoted as Accountants in B-16 in violation of the condition laid down in the aforesaid O.M.
7. Both these grounds of the appellant had no force for the following reasons:--
(a) , As stated earlier the promotions B-13 and B-15 in the Audit and Accounts Assistant was not a part of the said O.M. Therefore, he cannot claim the discriminative treatment to him while implementing the said 0.M.;
(b) By order dated 26-1-1995, B-13 and B-15 was allowed to certain Audit Assistants. This cannot be considered to be the impugned order so far as the appellant is concerned. He does not want to be promoted to B-13 or B-15 as, admittedly, he had already availed such promotions earlier though not provided in the said O.M. Thus, the notification dated 10-1-1995 does not provide any cause of action for the appellant;
(c) The order dated 26-1-1995 whereby Muhammad Shabbir Bangash was promoted to the post of Accountant with effect from 31-5-1983 could be termed as the impugned order for the accrual of cause of action to the appellant but the appellant has not challenged the said order by any appeal or departmental representation as required by section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973. The representation dated 6-2-1995 referred to in para. 7 of the appeal as Annexure 'F' does not mention a word about his cause of grievance against the promotion of the said Muhammad Shabbir Bangash. In this representation the appellant has based his claim on the order dated 10-1-1995, as mentioned hereinabove, and has not challenged the order dated 26-1-1995. Thus, the appeal will not be maintainable on this count as well;
(d) Lastly, the main repeated contentions of the appellant is for compliance of the provision of the O.M. Dated 18-8-1983 that one-third posts of Accountants should be filled by promotion from the "Audit Assistants and the Senior Auditors on the basis of their seniority in B-11". The issue of seniority in B-11 had been sub judice in earlier two rounds of litigation. His Appeal No, 172(P) of 1983 and Appeal No, 419(P) of 1987 followed by Miscellaneous Petitions Nos.117 of 1993 and 17 of 1994 in Appeal No, 419(P) of 1987 has been dismissed by this Tribunal, whereas his Civil Appeals Nos. 244-P/90 and 247-P/90, followed by C.M.P. No, 219/91 in C.A: No, 244-P/90 has been dismissed by the Supreme Court. All this litigation, by the present appellant, was directed toward the same and i,e, promotion as Accountant (BPS-16) on the basis of seniority as Audit Assistant in BPS-11 with effect from 1-7- 1983. In accordance with the law declared by the Honourable Supreme Court in Umar Malik case (reported in PLD 1987 SC 172), the matter of determination of seniority of Auditors and the Audit Assistants has been settled and cannot be reagitated again. The provision contained in the O.M.
Dated 18-8-1983 has been merged in the said verdict of the Supreme Court, and shall be read and interpreted in the light of the said verdict.
8. The result is that the appeal fails which is hereby dismissed with costs.
' Parties be informed.