1. ' MUHAMMAD QAIM JAN KHAN (CHAIRMAN).---This is a service appeal filed by Miss Shah Naz Begum under section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act, 1974 for the grant of graded pay.
2. ' Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the appellant has successfully undergone B.Ed. Course during the year 1990. Copy of degree is Annexure 'A'. That the appellant enlisted herself with the respondents as B.Ed. On 25-11-1990 (Annexure 'B'). That the appellant was appointed as S.E.T. In BPS-15 Rs,1,165 per month (fixed) vide Order No,5548/Gen/PF.PF. M. List/SET/DA-III, dated 4- 5-1991 (Annexurc 'C'). That the S.E.Ts. Were granted pay in BPS-16 vide Notifications dated 7-8-1991 and 19-12-1991. Consequently the pay scale of the appellant was also revised to BPS-16 and now the appellant is serving in BPS-16 on fixed pay. That the appellant is fully 'qualified and is perfectly entitled to graded pay scale. She submitted a representation to respondent No, 2 on 4-1-1996 forwarded by the Head Mistress concerned vide Letter No, 10, dated 9-1-1996. Respondent No, 2 rejected the said representation on 15-2-1996, hence the present appeal. The grounds of appeal are that grant of fixed pay to the appellant is illegal, void, against the prevailing law and natural justice. The appellant has acquired the requisite qualifications i,e, B.Sc., B.Ed. And also M.Ed, so she is perfectly qualified for the post of S.E.T. That a number of teachers/teachresses appointed in fixed pay have been granted graded pay. That the salary is running cause of action and can be challenged without any objection of limitation. Moreover, respondent No, 2 has disposed of departmental appeal without any objection of limitation which amounts to condonation of delay.
3. In the prayer the appellant has asked for the grant of graded pay with back benefits and costs.
4. ' Notices were issued to the respondents. They appeared through their respective representative/counsel, submitted reply to which the appellant has also submitted her rejoinder and after that detailed arguments of Mr. Adam Khan, Advocate for appellant and Mr. Sikandar Sahibzada, Advocate (Government Pleader) for respondents have been heard and record perused.
5. ' As far as the preliminary/legal objections are concerned, the appellant has got every cause of action as according to her she is perfectly qualified but denied graded pay. The appeal is perfectly maintainable in its present form and there is nothing on the record worth the name regarding estoppel by conduct on the part of the appellant. Moreover, from the rejection of the departmental appeal the present appeal is perfectly within time.
6. ' On factual side the appellants presently serving in BPS-16 (fixed). She is perfectly qualified for the post of S.E.T. As she is B.Sc., B.Ed. Which is a prerequisite qualification for the post. She has got a spotless service record and sufficient teaching experience at her credit. The contention of the respondent department that she has been granted pay on her turn on merit holds no ground as according to the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan if a person is working on a post, is fully qualified, so he is perfectly entitled to get the pay and other monetary benefits attached to that post. As far as the delay is concerned, this is a monetary cause which can come in the term of recurring cause, so the appeal cannot be thrown away on the ground of limitation. The appellant is fully qualified and she is B.Sc., B.Ed. And has also passed M.Ed., so her educational qualifications are much more than the required qualifications. She has got a spotless service record and gained sufficient teaching experience at her credit, so there can be no hurdle for the grant of graded pay to the appellant. So, in this background of the case we accept the appeal of the appellant. She is perfectly entitled to the grant of graded pay from the date of acquiring the requisite qualification, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. File be consigned to the record.