' MRS. SYEDA TAHIRA SAFDAR (MEMBER-II).---It is case of the appellant that he joined Secretariat Service Government of Balochistan as Section Officer B-17 in 1977, whereafter promoted in B-18 in 1986 and in B-19 in 1993. While in 1993 he was ripe up for promotion from B-19 to B-20. But he (the appellant) was superseded by the Provincial Selection Board in 1996. Feeling aggrieved of the same he preferred representation, but to no effect. Thereafter, again his (the appellant's) case was considered for promotion and processed, while again Provincial Selection Board rejected his case and allowed Supersession of his junior Muhammad Idrees Baloch on 29-4-1997. He again preferred representation but to no avail. While in 1998 third time his case for promotion was processed, but again the Provincial Selection Board rejected his case. While respondent No,3 was promoted and he (the appellant) was superseded. Respondent No,3 is junior to him. The said Board while rejecting his case has made observation to the effect that "unsatisfactory record of service", which amounts to adverse remark. He (the appellant) again agitated his grievance against the supersession while filed representation on 2-7-1998, but uptil now there is no reply in response of the same. The appellant has prayed for setting aside of Provincial Selection Board decision dated 2-7-1998 being illegal and void, while his seniority be restored and direction be issued for considering his case for promotion in B-20 on the ground that the said quantification has no sanctity in the eyes of law, further the Guidlines for Departmental Promotion Committees/Central Selection Boards have not been recognised nor notified by the Government, thus of no legal effect, the action taken in view of the same against him (the appellant) is of no legal effect. Furthermore, his case of promotion has not been considered in accordance with law and norms of justice, as such this Tribunal has the jurisdiction to look into the matter.
2. In reply respondent No,2 raised contention that the matter in question does not fall within jurisdiction of the Tribunal. As the posts in B-19 and above are selection posts, which no officer can claim as of right. As such no appeal lies in same respect. The Selection Board is fully competent to recommend a Civil Servant for promotion, supersession or deferment, after consideration of service record of the officer placed before the Board. Further, the Board has maintained consistently to supersede all those officers whose score in 'C.Rs, quantification was less than the required marks, as such the supersession of the appellant is lawful and in accordance with rules and policy. The respondent has prayed for dismissal of appeal.
3. The private respondent (No,3) Ghulam Sarwar Mengal in his reply strongly denied the contention of the appellant. According to him the appellant was appointed on political basis, violating the prescribed method. Further, the case of the appellant was considered for promotion in B-20 on three different occasions, while superseded him as he (the appellant) was not found up to the mark, no discrimination has been made. He has prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
4. The appellant is feeling aggrieved of his supersession and promotion of his juniors on basis of one or two marks of deficiency in overall assessment by Provincial Selection Board. It is apparent from record that the case of the appellant for promotion in B-20 has been considered by the Provincial Selection Board thrice in 1996, 1997 and 1998, while in all the three times he (the appellant) was superseded by other officers, who were junior to him. At present the supersession at third time is matter in issue. But before going into merits of the case it has to be determined that whether this Tribunal has the jurisdiction to decide the matter relating to promotion of a Civil Servant?
5. It is specifically provided in Balochistan Service Tribunal Act, 1974, section 3(2) that the Tribunal shall have exclusive jurisdiction in respect of matters relating to the terms and conditions of service of Civil Servant including disciplinary matter. It is further provided under section 4(b)(i) of the same Act: "(b) no appeal shall lie to a Tribunal against an order or decision of a departmental authority determining.---
(i) the fitness or otherwise of a person to be appointed to or hold a particular post or to be promoted to a higher post or grade; or"
6. The matter of promotion of a civil servant to a higher post or grade does not fall within jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Further, the promotion to a C higher grade or post is not a vested right of a civil servant, while it is also not included in matters relating to the terms and conditions of service.
7. Thus, in view of the same the only point which requires consideration is that whether the matter of promotion of the appellant has been legally dealt by the Department or not. It is provided under rule 7 of Balochistan Civil Servants (Appointments, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1979 that in case of promotion and transfers to posts in Grade-19 and above, shall be made on the recommendation of the Provincial Selection Board. In present case it is evident from record that the case of the appellant for promotion has been dealt by the Provincial Selection Board, whose formation has not been challenged to be illegal, and the recommendation of the Board has been acted upon by the Department. No mala tide is shown on the part of the Board or Authorities. Further, through the appellant has urged that his case has not been dealt in accordance with law and norms of justice as such this Tribunal have the jurisdiction. But the appellant has failed to specify the said violation of law. It is only the Selection Board who has to see the record of service of the concerned officer and to assess the same and thereby make the recommendation. Only following the "Guidelines for Departmental Promotion Committee/Central Selection Board", present on record, does not make the whole proceedings illegal. The Government is competent to make any policy or issue guidelines for smooth running of its Departments. This contention of the appellant has no force.
8. Thus, in view of the same the matter does not fall within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Therefore, there is no need to further go into merits of the case. The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. No orders as to costs. File after completion be consigned to record.