' SALEEM AKHTAR, J.---The petitioners seek leave to appeal against the judgment of the N.-W.F.P.
Service Tribunal, Peshawar, whereby appeal filed by the respondent was allowed and the order of the Deputy District Education Officer (Male) Secondary sent was set aside.
2. The brief facts are that respondent was appointed as S.E.T. Teacher on 1-10-1983. He completed 10 years' service as S.E.T. But as his services not regularised against the post of S.E.T. He preferred a departmental appeal which was rejected on 4-3-1993. The petitioners pleaded that the respondent has joined the service as S.E.T. Teacher on fixed pay and had sought regularization against S.E.T.
Post which required the qualification of B.Sc/B.A. And B.Ed and as the appellant had not acquired the qualification of B.Ed his services could not be regularized against the post of S.E.T. The learned Tribunal allowed the appeal in the following manner:-- "In this case the admitted facts are that the appellant has not obtained the Degree of B.Ed which is prerequisite for the post of S.E.T. Therefore, his services cannot be regularized against the S.E.T. Post.
However since his appointment in Education Department the appellant is working as S.E.T. For the last 10 years, therefore, he is entitled to the graded pay from the date of his departmental appeal.
The Tribunal while partially accepting the appeal directs that the appellant shall be allowed only the pay and scale of S.E.T. Post from when he joined the Education Department and he shall also be paid the arrears in the said scale from the date of institution of his departmental appeal. The services of the appellant as S.E.T. Cannot be regularized in the given circumstances. Parties are left to bear their own costs and file be consigned to the record."
3. Mr. Shahzad Akbar, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that as the respondent had not acquired the requisite qualification, he was not entitled to the regularization of his post nor could pay be given fixed under Pay Scale No,15, which is the regular scale for S.E.T. Post.
From the arguments and the facts, it seems that the respondent is given fixed pay for the last 10 years, although he is performing duties of S.E.T. Teacher's post. In such circumstances, in view of the case reported as Federation of Pakistan v. Shahzada Jan Shahpur and others 1986 SCM R 991), the petitioner could not be deprived of the scale of S.E.T. Post. The observations made by the Tribunal do not suffer from any illegality. In any event no legal question of general importance has been raised. Leave is refused.