Lawyers Directory Listing
Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.
Civil Petitions for Special Leave to Appeals Nos. 1383 and 1385 of 1983, decided on 31st January, 1984.
(From the Judgment, dated 28‑11‑1983 of the Punjab Service Tribunal passed in Service Appeal No. 219 of 1983 and No. 211/161 of 1983).
‑‑‑Art. 212(3)‑‑Petitioners promoted as stopgap arrangement and subject to clearance by Promotion Committee‑‑Subsequently, their promotion cancelled without making reference to Promotion Committee‑‑Order impugned‑‑Held: Promotion having been on ad hoc basis, petitioners had no locus standi to question Government's decision to revert them‑ Leave to appeal refused.
Riyasat Ali, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 31st January, 1984.
The petitioners in these two petitions, i.e. C.P.S.L. As. Nos.1383 and 1385 of 1983, had been initially recruited as Chowkidars in the Food Department of the Government of the Punjab and had been promoted in 1979 to the post of Food-grain Supervisor. Their order of promotion was, however, cancelled by the Secretary to the Government on 24‑4‑1983, against which they preferred appeal before the Tribunal but having failed there, are now seeking leave to appeal through these petitions.
2. The case of the petitioners is that they had not been promoted but appointed to the post of Food-grain Supervisor, that their appointment was by the competent authority, i.e. the Deputy Director Food, that they were possessed of the requisite qualification, i.e. Matriculation, and that, therefore, the impugned order of the Secretary, which amounted to termination of their service as Food-grain Supervisor was illegal having been passed without affording them any opportunity of hearing.
3. The orders, on the strength of which the petitioners claim to have been appointed as Food-grain Supervisor, however, show that they had in fact been "promoted" to that post "as a stopgap arrangement"., "subject to clearance by the Regional Promotion Committee" and "without prejudice to the bona fide rights of others". The Tribunal noticing this and observing that the promotions at the relevant time had been necessitated by the food procurement work and were only provisional arrangements, held that the same could not confer any right on the petitioners. Under the relevant rule, which is the West Pakistan Food Department Subordinate Executive Establishment Recruitment Rules, 1962, relied on by learned counsel for the petitioners, the method of recruitment to the post of Food-grain Supervisor is not by promotion but by "initial recruitment". Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that all that was needed to regularise the appointment was to have referred the case of the petitioners for clearance to the Regional Promotion Committee which had not been done in time but could be done even at a later stage and that, therefore, the abrupt cancellation of their promotion was illegal. We see no force in the contentions because their promotion having been on an ad hoc basis, they have no locus standi to question the Government's decision to revert them. Both the petitions are dismissed.
M. I. Petitions dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer