PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

KHUSHDIL KHAN MALIK vs SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION CABINET BLOCK, ISLAMABAD Ss — 2021 PLC(CS) 1383 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Citation
2021 PLC(CS) 1383 SUPREME-COURT
Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Year
2021
Reporter
PLC
Parties
KHUSHDIL KHAN MALIK vs SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION CABINET BLOCK, ISLAMABAD Ss
Subject matter
Service
Provisions referred to
S. 9---P; Scope--- Civil Servants Act

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

KHUSHDIL KHAN MALIK VS SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION CABINET BLOCK, ISLAMABAD Ss. 3 & 9---Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973, Pt. II--- Promotion on the basis of 'Time Scale Formula'---Scope--- Civil Servants Act, 1973 ('the 1973 Act') did not define the term 'Time Scale Promotion', therefore, it could not be considered as a term and condition of service---Promotion on the basis of Time Scale was not a regular promotion but a matter of policy granted to specific categories of professions by the relevant competent authority with the concurrence of the Finance Division---Such a policy was meant to grant benefits of higher pay scales to those cadres of civil servants who did not ordinarily get promotions to higher grades under the Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973 on a regular basis---Monetary benefits under the Time Scale Formula could not be extended generally to all civil servants but only to those class of civil servants as mentioned in the approved policy. Citation Name: 2021 PLC(CS) 1383 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case KHUSHDIL KHAN MALIK VS SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION CABINET BLOCK, ISLAMABAD S. 9---Promotion from BPS-21 to BPS-22 on basis of meritorious service---Special Selection Committee, powers of---Scope---In terms of the relevant policy for Promotion from BPS-21 to BPS-22 on basis of meritorious service [Finance Division O.M. F. No. 2(3)-R-3/86 dated 7.4.1987 (revised and accordingly notified vide Finance Division's Office Memorandums dated 25.11.2008 and 04-10-2012)] it was exclusively the prerogative of the Special Selection Committee to consider the competence of the officer for the grant of promotion to BPS-21 and BPS-22 for technical and professional officers, and not a vested right of a civil servant; it was actually a reward for such technical and professional officer who had distinguished himself by rendering meritorious services as an acknowledgment for exceptional contributions in his specialized field---Role of Special Selection Committee could not be assumed by any other authority by any stretch of interpretation of the relevant policy, and not even by the courts. Citation Name: 2021 PLC(CS) 1383 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case KHUSHDIL KHAN MALIK VS SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION CABINET BLOCK, ISLAMABAD R. 2, Cl. (viii) ---Induction in Secretariat Group---Pre-requisites---Petitioner was inducted into service against the post of Headmaster (BPS-18) on 24.12.1996 in the Federal Government Educational Institutions (Cantts/Garrison)--- In the year 2004 he was transferred to the Federal Government on deputation basis and he was repatriated to the parent department vide an Office Memorandum dated 20.10.2010; he had hardly served in his parent department as member of the teaching staff when he was again transferred in the year 2011 to the Federal Secretariat on deputation---Petitioner was neither an officer of Management Group nor of Secretariat Group as provided in Cl. 3 of the Office Memorandum No.2/2/75-ARC dated 12-04-1976 [Manual on Appointment, Promotion and Transfer (Edition-2013), Appendix A, Page No. 280]---Moreover he didn't belong to any of the 'Occupational Groups' in terms of Cl. (viii) of R. 2 of the Occupational Groups and Services (Probation, Training and Seniority) Rules, 1990; therefore he could not be considered for appointment through horizontal movement---Moreover there was nothing on record to show that the petitioner was ever recommended by the controlling Ministry of the parent department to be considered for such appointment---Therefore the petitioner had no vested right to be considered for induction/absorption in the Secretariat Group as per prescribed eligibility criteria and conditions laid down in the relevant laws and policies, despite his best service record---Petitions for leave to appeal were dismissed.

Other judgments reported in 2021 PLC

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English