Find a Lawyer

Case No. 324/739 of 1980, decided on 15th June, 1981.

‑‑‑Rr. 8(3) & 13‑‑Confirmation as Tehsildar‑‑Passing of departmental examination sine qua non‑‑Tehsildar promoted in Baluchistan in peculiar circumstances without condition of passing departmental examination transferred to Punjab as a Special case as part of General repatriation from Baluchistan to Punjab with condition of clearing departmental examination by availing two consecutive chances before he could be confirmed as Tehsildar in Punjab‑‑No relaxation of rules requiring passing departmental examination made by Baluchistan Government but condition otherwise ignored‑‑Neither promotion without condition departmental examination made in Baluchistan could exempt such promotee from said examination nor S&GAD circular letter, dated 15‑10‑1975 granting blanket exemption from pre‑promotion examination would cover case where departmental examination is specifically provided in relevant, rules.

‑Through this appeal Muhammad Ashraf Asghar, Tehsildar and Land Acquisition Collector, challenges the order, dated 2‑8‑1976 issued by the Board of Revenue requiring the appellant to complete the departmental examination for Tehsildars before he can be confirmed in the cadre of Tehsildars. Also impugned is the order, dated 19‑5‑1980 emanating from the Board and informing the appellant that his request for exemption from passing the departmental examination had been rejected by the Governor.

2. Brief facts of the case are as follows. The appellant joined service under the Government of West Pakistan in 1966 as Naib‑Tehsildar. On dismemberment of one‑Unit he became a servant of the Government of Baluchistan. There' he was promoted Tehsidlar in 1972. As a sequel to his kidnapping by tribesmen in 1973 and the ordeal suffered by him before he managed to escape from their hold, the appellant was transferred to the Punjab, the transfer being treated as a special case as par of the general repatriation of Punjab Officials from that Province. He was given the benefit of his service in Baluchistan towards seniority in the Punjab. While ordering sanction of his repatriation and seniority the condition was made that the appellant should complete the departmental examination of Tehsildars by availing himself of two consecutive chances at the latest commencing from the year 1976 before he could be confirmed in the cadre of Tehsildars.

3. The parties were heard. The appellant contended that before being transferred to the Punjab he had already been promoted as regular Tehsildar without having to go through the departmental examination and that, under the rules, his terms and conditions of service could not now be altered to his detriment and an examination imposed upon him which had not been imposed when he was in Baluchistan. His promotion as Tehsildar had been without condition that he would have to clear the examination subsequently, although according to rule 8 of the West Pakistan Tehsildari and Naib‑Tehsildari Service Rules, 1962, the passing of the examination was a requirement in Baluchistan also. Since then, at the behest of the Board of Revenue the Baluchistan Government had confirmed that no Tehsildar in the Province had been asked to qualify the examination ever-since the break‑up of one‑Unit. In support of this stand, the appellant stated that just as in the case of Section Officers in Baluchistan it had been decided that both promotee and direct Section Officers shall be confirmed in service if no orders regarding confirmation or otherwise are issued on expiry of their probation period, provided no departmental examination was held during the period of probation, similarly, since his service rules provide an identical benefit Tehsildars would be entitled to the same facility. It was further contended that, vide Services, General Administration and Department circular, dated 5‑10‑1975, the Punjab Government had exempted officials in NPS‑16 and above from taking pre‑promotion examinations, and therefore, the appellant was no longer required to pass the departmental examination.

4. On behalf of the respondent Board, the contention of the appellant were contested vigorously. It was submitted that passing of the departmental examination is a sine qua non for confirmation as Tehsildars in Punjab as well as in Baluchistan. If the Baluchistan Government had decided not to impose this strictly because of the special conditions prevailing there, the decision could not apply to the appellant once he had joined service in the Punjab. And, of course, it could not be said that the Baluchistan Government had completely done away with the examination for its own Tehsildars because, whereas it is true that no examination has taken place there since 1970 and regular promotions have taken place, but at the same time it appears that no relaxation too has been given to any Tehsildar under rule 13 of the Tehsildari Service, 1962. In any case, the examination was compulsory in the Punjab and the Government was not prepared to relax the rules for the appellant who had been promoted regular Tehsildar in Baluchistan under the peculiar circumstances prevailing there. It was further stated that the appellant had already cleared two subjects of the examination while serving in Baluchistan which showed that he was perfectly aware of his obligation in this regard.

5. After hearing the parties we have given our considered thought to this matter. Because of what the appellant went through during his kidnapping we would like to help him, but even we cannot give him what is not his due. We have pondered over the issue and have reached the conclusion that the appellant has to clear the departmental examination. It is for his own good if he does so. His contention that he was promoted regular Tehsildar without an examination cannot hold good in the Punjab. Just as he refers to his terms and conditions of service which cannot be altered to his disadvantage, similarly there , are certain service obligations and responsibilities which cannot be relaxed for his sake. The departmental examination is an integral component of service as Tehsildar, and if the Baluchistan Government had chosen to ignore the requirement because of its extraordinary needs it was its own lookout. The Punjab Government might not feel it necessary to make a similar concession. As for the Baluchistan decision about Section Officers, if that Government had felt that the same decision was also called for in the case of Tehsildars it would certainly have decided to extend the rule to them also. We have also given our attention to the S&GAD circular regarding blanket exemption in pre‑promotion examinations. We are of the view that circular does not apply to the departmental examination for Tehsildars. The pre‑promotion examinations which were exempted were general in nature and not provided specifically by Rules specially framed for the purpose, as the Tehsildari examination is. The circular will, therefore, not give any benefit to the appellant in this case.

6. In view of the above, we do not see any justification for issuing,, any direction to the respondent Board and the appeal is, consequently, dismissed.

A.E.

Appeal dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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