Find a Lawyer

‑ R. 50 read with Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 149‑Promo tion, rescission of‑Show‑cause notice‑Contesting respondent, an Octroi Superintendent, being reverted, petitioner promoted to fill up vacancy Respondent's representation subsequently accepted by Government and respondent restored to his former pay scale‑Held : Order of reversion having been set aside by competent authority, petitioner could not challenge same‑Only one post of Octroi Superintendent having existed in Municipal Committee concerned natural consequence of acceptance of representation of respondent being restoration to him of his former post‑Order of promotion of petitioner however once having taken effect and certain rights having been created in his favour, Government/Municipal Committee could not competently withdraw or revise same without issuing him a show‑cause notice . [Civil services].

Pakistan v. Muhammad Hamayat Ullah Farooqi P L D 1969 S C 407 ref.

Miss Gulshan Ara Alam for Petitioner.

Tanvir Ahmad Khan, A. A.‑G. with Ch. Mahmud‑ul‑Hassan for Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.

Fazal Karim Quseshi for Respondent No. 4.

Date of hearing : 28th March, 1982.

This writ petition calls in question the validity of the decision dated the 5th of December, 1981, of respondent No. 1, whereby the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Sialkot, dated 6‑4‑1980 was maintained wherein penalty of reversion of respondent No. 4 was reduced to that of stoppage of two increments.

2. The facts relevant for the disposal of the writ petition may be briefly stated. Respondent No. 4 was serving as Octroi Superintendent, Municipal Committee, Daska. The Administrator, Municipal Committee, Daska, vide his order dated 30‑8‑1979 (Annexure I), placed respondent No. 4 . under suspension and simultaneously, the petitioner was transferred and posted as Octroi Superintendent in his own pay and grade. Subsequently, discip linary inquiry proceedings were initiated against respondent No. 4 under the West Pakistan Municipal Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1963. As a result of the inquiry proceedings, respondent No. 4 was reverted to the post of Senior Clerk in N: P. S. No. 6 with effect from 30‑8‑1979 under the orders dated 27‑11‑1979, of the Administrator, Municipal Committee, Daska. In order to fill in the vacancy caused by the reversion of respondent No. 4, the petitioner was promoted from ‑ N. P. S. No. 6 to N. P. S. No. 11 with effect from 1‑1‑1980 by an order dated 30‑12‑1979 of the Administrator, Municipal Committee, Daska (Annexure A). Respondent No. 4 filed an appeal against his reversion. The appeal was partly accepted by the Deputy Commissioner and the penalty of reversion was reduced to stoppage of two increments by an order dated 6‑4‑1980 (Annexure III). Consequent upon the acceptance of appeal of respondent No. 3, the petitioner was reverted and posted as Adda Incharge, Daska, by an order dated 10‑4‑1980 of the Chairman, Municipal Committee, Daska (Annexure 111). The petitioner challenged his order of reversion before the Deputy Commissioner, but the same was dismissed by an order dated 14‑9‑1980 (Annexure IV). The petitioner filed further representation before the Commissioner which was consigned to record on account of default. The petitioner also moved the Provincial Government for the redress of his grievance. The Govern ment accepted the representation of the petitioner and set aside the order dated 6‑4‑1980 of the Deputy Commissioner, Sialkot (Annexure IV), by an order dated 10‑6‑1981 (Annexure B). Respondent No. 4 made a representation against the aforesaid order before respondent No. 1, which was accepted and in consequence thereof, the letter dated 10‑6‑1981 (Annexure B) was withdrawn and the Deputy Commissioner, Sialkot, was directed to imple ment its earlier decision dated 6‑4‑1980, whereby the penalty of reversion imposed upon respondent No. 4 was reduced to stoppage of two increments by letter dated 5‑12‑1981 (Annexure C).

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the validity of the impugned order on the ground that once the Government accepted the representation of the petitioner and set aside the order of the Deputy Commissioner, dated 6‑4‑1980, the decision taken in favour of the petitioner could not have been subsequently withdrawn on the representation of respondent No. 4, without providing an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. The learned counsel for the contesting respondent submits that the petitioner has no vested right to hold the post of Octroi Superintendent which was assigned to him as a stopgap arrangement and, therefore, no prejudice has been caused to the petitioner for not providing him an oppor tunity of being heard by respondent No. 1.

4. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. The order of reversion against respondent No. 4 having been set aside by the competent authority, the petitioner has no locus standi to challenge the same. It is an admitted fact that only on vacancy exists for the post of Octroi Superintendent in Municipal Committee, Daska and, therefore, on the acceptance of appeal of respondent No. 4, the natural consequence was to restore him to the post of Octroi Superin tendent. The petitioner has no vested right to hold a particular post in consequence of his promotion.

5. Be that as it may, the order of promotion of the petitioner from N. P. S. 6 to N. P. S. 11 once having taken certain legal effect and certain right created in his favour, the Government/Municipal Committee was not com petent to withdraw or rescind the same without issuing him a show‑cause notice. Reference may be made to Pakistan through the Secretary Ministry of Finance v. Muhammad Hamayat Ullah Farooqi P L D 1969 S C 407.

6. The upshot of the whole discussion is that the promotion of the petitioner in Grade N. P. S. 11 cannot be set aside unless and until an opportunity of being heard is provided to the petitioner against the action proposed to be taken against him. The Municipal Committee, Daska, may, however; take such further action as it may deem fit in the exigencies of service, consequent upon the acceptance of appeal of respondent No. 4, whereby he has been restored to his original post, after providing the petitioner an opportunity of being heard against the action proposed to be taken.

7. With these observations, the writ petition is accepted with no order as to costs.

s. A. H. Petition accepted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.