#TBE ' By its decision, dated 13-1-1989, the learned Labour Court, No,1, Lahore, accepted the grievance petition of Muhammad Hanif, an ex-employee of P.R.T.C. Lahore, filed under section 25-A, Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. The P.R.T.C. Has come up in appeal to this forum.
2. Muhammad Hanif got appointment as Junior Clerk (BPS.5), in the P.R.T.C., on 1-2-1980, and Muhammad Azam respondent No,2, was appointed in the same capacity on 21-2-1982. The latter, however, allegedly in a fraudulent manner, manoeuvred to show that he had been promoted as Senior Clerk (BPS-7) on 20-5-1989. The P.R.T.C. Belies Muhammad Hanif's plea and contests his claim, thus, favouring Muhammad Azam, according to whom he had actually been promoted, and two persons senor him, Safdar Hussain Shah and. Muhammad Hannif had been ignored, because of their bad recorded. Surprisingly, however, the matter had not been placed before the DTC, and orders of promotion of Muhammad Azam had purportedly been passed, on a favourable report recorded by the Office Superintendent. A criminal case however, was registered against both of them, and in the inquiry conducted by the Senior Special Judge-cum-Enquiry Officer (Mr. Zulfiqar Ali Toor) the enquiry report Exh.P-10, which is worth reading, was recorded against these persons.
The fraud schematially played was unearthed, and even recovery of the amount having deceitfully been obtained in excess by Muhammad Azam was effected.
3. This is a classical case of fraud and fabrication and it depicts a horrible story of foul-play, forgery and cheating, having been committed by Muhammad Azam, in complicity with Haji Mohy-ud-Din Sajid, Office Superintendent. The orders, dated 20-5-1989 and 30-5-1989 (Annexures B & C) actually pertained to leave applications of Munir Ahmad and Muhammad Yaqoob, and the, same were cleverly made use of by the aforementioned two persons, in showing that Muhammad Azam had got the promotion and his pay in the higher scale had been fixed. The genuine orders of the aforesaid dates are Annexures D and E.
4. Azam and Hadi Shah acted in a truly clandestine and cunning style and kept secret the Orders Nos.827 and 913, dated 20-5-1989 and 30-5-1989 and made the same published much later.
Despite his so-called promotion as senior clerk, Muhammad Azam remained a Junior clerk, uptil 7- 7-1991. He however, managed to get 10% dual-charge allowance w,e,f, 3-7-1989 uptil 5-4-1991. The seniority list of senior clerks was published on 16-6-1990, and the same did not carry the name of Muhammad Azam. It has, therefore, rightly been determined and declared by the learned lower Court that the order of seniority of Muhammad Azam was fake, forged and fabricated.
5. Muhammad Azam was matriculate and Muhammad Hanif F.A. The latter had joined service about two years before. It is not denied that Hanif was senior to Azam. Safdar Shah got retirement in the year 1993, under the Golden Shake Hand Scheme, and did not remain in the picture, but Muhammad Hanif continued agitating the matter. There is no denying the fact that Muhammad Hanif deserve promotion as senior clerk prior to Muhammad Azam. When the order respecting A Muhammad Azam's promotion came to light, in July 1991, Hanif issued the grievance notice, which, in the circumstances of the case, could not be treated as time-barred and the grievance petition similarly could also not be regarded as having been rendered barred by the Law of limitation .
6. Validity of the orders Exhs. P.3 and 5 showing promotion and fixation of pay of Muhammad Azam, in the higher grade, has rightly been dubbed as dubious, irregular and unlawful, and I would affirm this finding.
7. The learned Court below has rightly set aside the order of promotion of Muhammad Azam respondent, but a cautious order has been passed in directing the Corporation to re-consider the entitlement of Hanif to promotion from the date due, on the basis of seniroity-cum-suitability. I am of the opinion that this would further prolong the agony of the official, who has already been hit very hard, If there was room for promotion of Muhammad Azam, in May, 1989, (although he had stealthily, surreptitiously and fraudulently obtained it), Muhammad Hanif also could certainnly at that time be considered for promotion as senior clerk. This shall be conceded to him, without further deliberation -and delay, from the same date, and the arrears, on calculation, shall be parted with in his favour, even though the Corporation has been wound up.
8. With this modification, I would uphold the decision of the learned Labour Court, and dismiss the appeal of the Corporation, being bereft of all force. Hanif shall . Also be entitled to get the costs of the litigation throughout.