JUDGMENT SYED AAL-E-AHMAD, MEMBER-I. Mst. Qamar-Un-Nisa Majid, Senior Headmistress, Zeenat Model Girls High School, Chah Miran, Lahore, has filed appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunal Act, 1974, requesting tor the implementation of Education Departments Notification, dated 29.12.1991, under which she was promoted to grade 18, and other consequential benefits qua her batch- mates.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant joined the Education Department as SST in the year 1965. She was confirmed in the same cadre on her turn vide order dated 23.9.1980.
Subsequently, she was promoted to grade-18 vide order dated 29.12.1991 passed by the Secretary Education Department, Government Of the Punjab. She was, however, not allowed to take over the charge of the post on the wrong presumption that the appellant belongs to the general cadre whereas she has been promoted against the post of comprehensive cadre.
3. It was contended by the appellant that she was always member of general cadre as he joined the department in this cadre and subsequently confirmed in the same cadre vide orders dated 23.9.1986 and subsequently promoted to grade-18. Her selection as subject specialist cannot be allowed to sever her lien in her parent cadre.
4. The respondent department in its written objections contended that the appellant belongs to the comprehensive cadre and she was erroneously promoted in BS-18 in general cadre. She was not, therefore, allowed to join in grade-18.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the D.A. It was contented by the learned counsel that the appellant joined the Education Department in the general cadre as SST. She >vas confirmed as such in the same cadre vide Notification dated 23.9.1980. Although she was selected as Subject Specialist by the Public Service Commission but she was never confirmed in that cadre.
Similarly, the appellant- never abandoned her lien in the general cadre; as . Such the contention of the respondent department that she belongs to comprehensive cadre is not tenable. The learned counsel referred to the judgment of Honourable Supreme Court reported in 1992 (PLC (CS) 411. In which it has been held that the lien of a permanent civil servant could not be terminated even with his consent; same could, however, be terminated only when he was confirmed against some other permanent post. In this case, the respondent department has failed to establish that the appellant had been confirmed in the cadre of subject specialist.
6. On the other had. D.A. Argued that with the appointment of the appellant as Subject Specialist, she severed her connections with the general order and that promotion order of the appellant, dated 29.12.1991 were erroneously issued by the department; as such she was not allowed to join.
7. I have considered the arguments of the parties and find that the department never withdrew the notification dated 29.12.1991 granting promotion to the appellant in BS-18 vide Notification dated 29.12.1991; as such the respondent department cannot take up the plea that the notification was erroneously issued. The notification is still in the field and the respondents are bound to comply with the said notification, being their voluntary act. Besides, it is also observed that the lien of the appellant was never terminated in her original i.e. General cadre. Neither the department did it on its on nor the appellant ever applied for such termination. The appellant, being a permanent member of general cadre (SST cadre) continues to hold her lien in the said cadre in the light of judgment of Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan 1992 PLC (CS) 411.
8. I, therefore, accept the appeal and a direction is issued to the respondent to put effect to the notification, of promotion of the appellant dated 29.12.1991. She will also be entitled to all the consequential benefits which may accrue to here according to her seniority under the rules.
Compliance report shall be sent to the tribunal within one month as the appellant is superannuating in the near future.