' NOOK, MUHAMMAD MAGSI (MEMBER).---The appellant Mr. Ghazanfar Hussain, U.D.C. In Tench Bhatta Sub-Division (E), WAPDA, Rawalpindi has come up in appeal to this Tribunal against the order dated 26-2-1994, whereby move-over from B-9 to B-10 has been granted to him with effect from 1-12-1993. The claim of the appellant is that he is entitled for move-over with effect from 1-12- 1992 as he reached at the maximum of B-9 on 1-12-1992 but his move-over with effect from 1-12- 1992 has been refused to him simply on the ground of punishment of "censure". His departmental appeal against the aforesaid order has also been rejected by order dated 30-9-1995 which was received by him on 19-10-1995.
2. We have heard the appellant who argued his case himself and Syed Kazim Hussain Kazmi counsel for WAPDA alongwith Mr. Ghulam Hussain Departmental Representative. Admittedly move- over from B-9 to B-10 was due to the appellant with effect from 1-12-1992 but he has been granted move-over with effect from 1-12-1993 on account of minor penalty of censure awarded to the appellant vide order dated 25-1-1989.
3. The question for determination in this appal is as to whether the minor penalty of censure awarded to the appellant by order dated 25-1-1989 does or does not stand in the way of grant of move-over to him from the due date i,e, 1-1,2-1992. The move-over is simply an extension of the pay scale of civil servant. However, in practice the procedure like that of promotion is applied while granting move-over from a lower to the higher scale. Admittedly there is no adverse remarks in the relevant A.C.Rs, of the appellant. The refusal of move-over with effect from 1-12-1992 is based simply on minor penalty of "censure". Since minor punishment cannot stand in the way of promotion to higher rank as per decision of the other Courts and the Supreme Court of Pakistan, we are of the view that it should not create hurdle in the way of grant of move-over. It was held in 1985 PLC (C.S.) 848 that "minor punishments cannot stand in the way of promotion to higher rank". The same view was taken in Nazir Ahmed v. D.I.-G. Police, Faisalabad and others 1986 PLC (C.S.) 228. In this case minor punishment of "censure" was held, cannot stand in the way of pro forma promotion of the appellant. In another writ petition filed by Ch. Ahmed Durrani, Superintendent, Central Jail, Rawalpindi, Lahore High Court observed that "minor penalties imposed on the petitioner could not have posed a hurdle for consideration of his case for promotion by the Promotion Board". The reason'for refusing the grant of promotion to the petitioner in that case, in the first instance, was that an inquiry was pending against him, which ended merely administering a warning to him. The basis of second denial was that he was censured in consequences of another inquiry. The decision of the High Court was challenged before the Supreme Court of Pakistan but the Supreme Court of Pakistan has dismissed the petition and agreed with the observations made by the Lahore High Court. This case is reported as 1991 SCMR 1637. The. Same view has recently been taken in 1994 PLC (C.S.) 1544, where it is held "even minor punishment is not allowed to stand in the way of promotion of a civil servant".
' In view of the law laid down in above-referred cases and in the interest of justice and fairplay we are of the view that the denial of move-over, from (B-9) to (B-10) to the appellant, which is simply an extension of pay scale, on the basis of a minor penalty of censure, is not well-founded. When a civil servant could be promoted with minor penalties imposed on him, there is no reason whatever why the benefit of extension of scale by way of move-over should be denied to him. In these circumstances, a simple punishment of "censure" cannot stand in the way of grant of move-over to the appellant. We, therefore, accept the appeal and modify the impugned order dated 26-2-1994 and allow him move-over with effect from the due date i,e, 1-12-1992 with all consequential benefits. There is no order as to costs.