Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition No. Q‑25 of 1980, decided on 31st May, 1981.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of Service Tribunal (Baluchistan) Quetta in Appeal No. 21 of 1978).

‑‑‑Art. 212(3)‑‑Baluchistan Service Tribunals Act (V of 1974), S.4‑ Petition for leave to appeal‑‑Seniority‑‑Petitioner an untrained Senior English Teacher claiming seniority over respondents who were trained Senior English Teachers‑‑Petitioner not having requisite qualification on relevant date when integrated seniority list concerning respondents was prepared and his date of appointment to service also being later than those of respondents, case, held, not fit for grant of leave to appeal.

Iqbal Ahmed, Advocate Supreme Court with Yaqub K.E. Eusufzai, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 31st May, 1981.

Kh. Muhammad Naseer, Headmaster Government Sandeman High School, Quetta, feeling aggrieved has come to this Court for leave to appeal against the judgment dated 19‑7‑1980 of the Baluchistan Service Tribunal in Appeal No. 21 of 1978.

The petitioner had moved the Baluchistan Service Tribunal through appeal under section 4 of the Baluchistan Service Tribunals Act, 1974, against the seniority list of the Senior English Teachers as it stood on 21‑6‑1975 and seniority list of the Members of the Baluchistan Education Service Class‑II upgraded to Class I with effect from 1‑6‑‑1970 issued, vide Government of Baluchistan Education Department section II, vide Notification No.l‑16/78‑End‑11/7694, dated 14‑6‑1978. He prayed that he be declared senior to respondents 2 to 12 by virtue of his early appointment as Senior English Teacher.

The Service Tribunal declined to give the petitioner any relief regarding his contention that he was entitled to Grade‑17 with affect from 9‑4‑1968 and that he was also entitled to Grade‑18 with all the benefits thereof. The Tribunal observed that it was not competent to grant such a relief as it would be in violation of clause (i) of proviso (b) of section 4 of the Baluchistan Service Tribunals Act, 1974. The Tribunal thoroughly discussed the question of seniority of the petitioner in the S.E.T. grade and ultimately came to the conclusion that he was senior to respondent No.4, Ch. Nazir Ahmad, and that he was also senior to respondent No.12 in the cadre of S.E.Ts.

The petitioner in his petition before us claims that he is senior to respondents Nos. 3 to 13 in order of seniority of S.E.T. and that he be declared to be entitled to promotion as Headmaster with effect from 27‑6‑1959 when he passed his B.A.B.Ed. examination.

We have heard the petitioner and his counsel, but we feel unable to agree with them. The petitioner joined the Government Service as a J. V . Teacher in the Pay Scale of Rs.80‑5‑100‑5‑150 on 10‑3‑1953. He was at that time neither a graduate nor was a trained S.E.T. He passed his B.A. in 1957 and B. Ed. in 1959 and M.A. in 1965. He was promoted as Headmaster on 16‑9‑1968. The seniority list of Senior English Teachers as it stood on 31‑12‑1975 was prepared and circulated by the Deputy Director Education, Quetta, vide his Memo. No. 4309/A/119/EB dated 17‑i‑1976. The petitioner was placed at serial No. 27 in that list. That list held good until the jurisdiction of the Secretary, Education, Government of Baluchistan, Quetta, to frame the formula on which seniority list was based was challenged. Ultimately the matter was referred by the Governor of Baluchistan on 2‑10‑1977 through the M . L . authorities.

Consequently a provisional seniority list of Class II officers (upgraded to Class I) was prepared and circulated vide No.1‑1678‑E II‑1814 dated 25‑2‑1978. The petitioner then submitted a representation against that list, which was rejected and his review petition was also rejected and the petitioner was advised to seek his redress before the Baluchistan Service Tribunal.

The Tribunal held that according to the formula prescribed for the determination of seniority and approved by the Governor, the S.E.Ts appointed between 1‑1‑1949 and 13‑10‑1955 had to be divided into two categories, viz; trained S.E.Ts. in the scale of Rs.150‑10‑250 and untrained S.E. Ts. in the scale of Rs.80‑5‑100/5‑150; and those, S.E.Ts. who were not given the higher Scale on 1‑1‑1949 had to be considered junior to those who were given the higher scale. The formula further shows that on and from 14‑10‑1955 a single list of S.E.Ts. consisting of 3 categories of S.E.Ts. i.e. S.E.Ts. (trained) of Baluchistan, S.E.Ts. of Baluchistan States Union and S.E.Ts of Baluchistan (untrained) had to be prepared determining seniority in each category according to the length of service, but the untrained S.E.Ts. were to take their position commencing from the bottom of the integrated seniority list of the trained S.E.Ts. of Baluchistan and Baluchistan States Union.

The petitioner as shown above was appointed as S.E.T. on 10‑3‑1958, but he did not have the qualifications on 14‑10‑1955, as a result whereof he could not be assigned a place in the cadre of S.E.T. (trained). He was, therefore, assigned seniority according to the length of his service in the category of untrained S.E.Ts.

The petitioner's contention, while challenging the seniority list of Class II officers upgraded to Grade‑17 with effect from 1‑6‑1970 is based on the seniority in the S.E.Ts. list. According to West Pakistan Education Service Class 11 Rules, 1963, the seniority of promotee officers has to be fixed with reference to the date of continuous appointment to that service. In the circumstances, his seniority as a S.E.T. would not, therefore, benefit, him, moreso as his date of appointment to the said service is later than the respondents' dates of appointments. In the seniority list prepared on 14‑6‑1978, as indicated by the Service Tribunal, the petitioner has been given a wrong position therein.

We therefore find that it is not a fit case in which leave could be granted. This petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

M.Y.H. Leave refused.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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