1. ' JALAL-UD-DIN AKBARJI (CHAIRMAN).---We propose to dispose of all the aforementioned 3 (three) appeals by this single judgment, as fact are the same.
2. ' All the appellants are working as Senior Auditors (Selection Grade) in the Office of the Accountant-General of Pakistan Revenues, Islamabad. They have been aggrieved by Notification No,S.R.O. 17(1)/2000, dated 22nd January, 2000, according to which their promotion prospects have been blocked as the promotion quota has been deleted. Being aggrieved, the appellants filed departmental appeals, which were rejected on 17-6-2000 and finally filed the present appeals on 15-7-2000, resubmitted on 31-7-2000.
2. The appellants' claim that the following letter, dated 24th July, 1973, will govern their promotion to SAS Cadre:- " No . F . 6(22)/72-E. IV/1468 GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN MINISTRY OF FINANCE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT (FINANCE DIVISION)
3. Islamabad, the 24th July, 1973.
4. ' The Auditor-General of Pakistan, Lahore ' Subject:- PROMOTION QUOTA SAS CADRE.
5. ' Sir, ' I am directed to say that President has been pleased to decide that 33% of the posts in the SAS Cadre would be filled in by promotion from UDCs/SGCs on the basis of seniority-cum-fitness. This would apply to each Audit Office/Military Accounts office separately.
6. ' This would apply to the vacancies occurring on or after 1-7-1973.
7. Your Obedient Servant (Sd.)
8. (S.M. FAIZ), Section Officers"
9. ' The promotion in the SAS Cadre against 33% exemption quota ceased to remain in force w.e.f 22- 1-2000 vide letter, dated 20-5-2000 and the Gazette of Pakistan, Extraordinary dated 21-1-2000 of Notification of SRO 17(1)/2000 are as under:-- "OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR-GENERAL OF PAKISTAN CONSTITUTION AVENUE, ISLAMABAD.
10. ' No .448-Estt . IV/C/30-97 Dated 20-5-2000.
11. ' The Accountant-General, N. -W. F .P. , Peshawar.
12. ' Subject: REVISION OF RECRUITMENT RULES FOR THE POST OF ASSISTANT ACCOUNTS OFFICER (B-16) IN PAKISTAN AUDIT DEPARTMENT.
13. ' Kindly refer to your Letter No,Admn. 1-37 (Asstt) DPC/948, dated 28-3-2000 on the above subject.
(2) The S.R.O. 17(1)/2000 has been issued with the approval of Establishment Division which is the competent authority to decide service matters under the Rules of Business.
(3) The revised recruitment rules issued vide above-referred S.R.O. Dated 22-1-2000 does not provide for promotion against 33% exemption quota on seniority-cum-fitness basis. Therefore, 33% exemption quota ceased to exist w,e,f, 22-1-2000.
(4) Finance Division Letter No,F.6(22)/72-R-IV/1468, dated 24-7-1973 which provides promotion against 33% exemption quota has ceased to remain in force w,e,f, 22-1-2000. Hence no promotion against 33% exemption quota can be made.
14. (Sd.)
15. (Syed Hamid Hussain), Director (Establishment)."
16. "The Gazette of Pakistan EXTRAORDINARY PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY ISLAMABAD, SATURDAY, JANUARY 22, 2000 PART II Statutory Notifications (S.R.O.)
17. GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR-GENERAL OF PAKISTAN NOTIFICATION ISLAMABAD, the 22nd January, 2000 ' S.R.O.17(1)/2000.---In pursuance of sub-rule (2) of rule 3 of the Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973, the following method, qualifications and other conditions are laid down for appointment to the under-mentioned posts in the Office of the Auditor-General of Pakistan:-- CONDITIONS FOR PROMOTION
3. Promotion to the post in column 2 below shall be made by selection from amongst the persons who hold the posts specified in column 3, on a regular basis and fulfil the conditions of eligibility as prescribed in column 4.
18. ' S.No, Designation and BPS Persons eligible Conditions of eligibility
1. Assistant Accounts (i) Senior Auditor Should have passed (BPS-11) SAS Part I and II examination and secured not less than 40% Marks in each paper and 45% marks in aggregate.
19. Officer/Assistant (ii) Junior Auditor OR Audit Officer (BPS-5)
20. (BPS-16) should have passed examination of AAT."
3. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contended that S.R.O. 17(1)/2000 laying down conditions for promotion will be prospective and all those who are serving and have not qualified SAS will be entitled for promotion on the basis of seniority-cum-fitness against the quota of 33% of the posts in the SAS cadre. Judgments reported as 1994 PLC (C.S.) 755 and 1999 PLC (C.S.) 531 were referred. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that according to the insertion of subsection (2) by Act 5 of 1996 in section 3 of the Civil Servants Act, 1973, the terms and conditions of service of the appellants will not be varied and accordingly the appellants will be having vested right, to be promoted according to the Finance. Division's letter dated 24-7-1973. The respondent department has filed objections and has referred to S.R.O. 17(1)/2000 dated 22-1-2000 and have stated that 33% quota has been abolished w.e.f 22-1-2000. The cases of the appellant will be dealt with in accordance with the said S.R.O. 17(1)/2000. It is further submitted that the terms and conditions of service of the appellants have not been varied nor the appellants have been put in disadvantageous position because the appellants have equal opportunity with the other staff to qualify SAS Examination and promoted as Assistant Accounts Officer/Assistant Audit Officer. It was further submitted that a civil servant cannot claim a vested right in promotion or in the terms and conditions for promotion to higher post. The rules have been changed in the interest of service, so that qualified persons can be inducted in the SAS Cadre after qualifying the examination for the same and the appellants, if pass the requisite examination will be considered for promotion to the next higher post according to the conditions for promotion as indicated in the rules notified on 22- 1-2000.
4. We will refer to the judgment report of the august Supreme Court of Pakistan in appeal of Government of N.-W.F.P., Health and Social Welfare Department through its Secretary v. Dr. Sheikh Muzafar Iqbal and others (1990 SCMR 132i). This judgment is identical to the facts and the law applicable in case of promotion to higher post and the rules framed thereunder. The august Supreme Court of Pakistan after referring to earlier judgments has firmly ruled and laid down the law as under:-- "No one can claim a vested right in promotion or in the terms and conditions for promotion to a higher post. The Government has the right to enhance the qualifications and the standards for recruitment and promotion in order to maintain efficiency in service. Except for the post which the civil servant happens to hold, he cannot claim vested right in other higher tiers in the hierarchy."
21. ' This judgment of the august Supreme Court of Pakistan is in conformity with section 9 of the Civil Servants Act, 1973 (Act No,LXXI of 1973) which is as under:-- "9. Promotion.---(1) A civil servant possessing such minimum qualification as may be prescribed shall be eligible for promotion to a (higher) post for the time being reserved under the rules for departmental promotion in the service or cadre to which he belongs."
22. ' The reference by the learned counsel for the appellant to clause (ii) of section 3 of the Act will apply to the terms and conditions of service of an incumbent of the post in accordance with the Act and the Rules framed thereunder.
23. ' Learned counsel referred to the judgment report of the august Supreme Court of Pakistan in Appeal of Muhammad Arshad Saeed, D.I.-G. Police v. Government of Pakistan through Secretary, Establishment Division and 29 others (1994 PLC (C.S.) 755), which supports the case of the respondents rather than of the appellants and the relevant portion of the judgment is as under:-- "9. There is, however, a more relevant objection to the competency of this service appeal not considered by the Tribunal but covered by the law laid down by this Court. The policy decision dated 10-2-1980 related to induction of Army Officers in Unified Grade-18. When it was passed and came into effect the appellant was not in that Grade. He came in that grade subsequently when it had already been in force for some time. The decisions of this Court in Khan Faizullah Khan v.
24. Government of Pakistan through The Establishment Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat and another (PLD 1974 SC 291) and Muhammad Umar Malik and others v. Federal Service Tribunal and others (PLD 1987 SC 172) lay down the law that a person not in the particular grade but expecting to come into that grade cannot challenge the alterations of the rules relating to that higher grade." (The underlining is ours).
25. ' The judgment of this Tribunal relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant report Muhammad Rafiq Malik and 2 others v. Secretary, Establishment Division and 7 others (1999 PLC (C.S.) 531) is not relevant to the case of the appellants. The appeal in this Tribunal was in connection with re-designation and merger of cadres and seniority of the officers brought into a single cadre.
5. The letter dated 24-7-1973 on subject of promotion quota SAS Cadre was followed till the conditions laid down for promotion to SAS Cadre by S.R.O. 17(1)/2000 duly issued in pursuance of sub-rule (2) of rule 3 of Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973 and the letter dated 24-7-1973, ceased to remain in force w,e,f 22-1-2000. The appellants have not qualified SAS Parts I and II Examination or have not passed examination of AAT, therefore, they have no vested right for promotion into the SAS Cadre on the conditions of eligibility as laid down by the aforementioned S.R.O 17(I)/2000 dated 22-1-2000. The appellant or any of the appellants if now qualify in accordance with the conditions of eligibility and then will be considered for promotion in SAS Cadre instead of 33% exemption quota allowed to them by letter dated 24-7-1973 on the subject of promotion quota SAS Cadre. We are also of the view that qualification by examination of a civil servant and thereafter, the conditions of eligibility is a progressive, healthy and encouraging rule than stereotype rules of seniority-cum-fitness in a service cadre for promotion to the next higher post. The S.R.O. 17(I)/2000 dated 22-1-2000 has been issued under the Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973 and, therefore, no exception can be taken to the same either by its prospective application or retroactivity of the rules for promotion to the higher post essentially because the subject letter, dated 24-7-1973 was issued neither under any rules or in conformity with section 9 of the Civil Servants Act, 1973.
26. ' The appeals, therefore, fail and dismissed accordingly. The parties are to bear their own costs.