MUHAMMAD RUSTAM vs REGISTRAR, PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR Ss — 2022 PLC(CS) 1239 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

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

MUHAMMAD RUSTAM VS REGISTRAR, PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR Ss.9 & 26---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1989, R. 18---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Civil Servants Promotion Policy, 2009, Para I(a)---Promotion of High Court employees---Petitioner sought for his proforma upgradation to BPS-20 with retrospective effect from the date when he had completed 17 years of service and above---Petitioner contended that he was having more than 5 years service in BPS-18, as such, the Notification dated 04.11.2011 was upgraded vide Notification dated 28/03/2017 and 3 private secretaries of High Court were upgraded, as such, similar treatment should also be given to the petitioner---Respondent / authorities contended that there was no concept of retrospective upgradation; that by the time when the up-gradation to BPS-20 was allowed to certain officers of the High Court, the petitioner had already retired; that retired employees could not claim parity with the serving employees; that petition in hand was hit by the principle of 'laches' and where there was inordinate delay in filing of constitutional petition, High Court was not required to go into the merits of the case---Held, that promotion policy could not be applied in isolation---Length of service as to determine eligibility for promotion as given in Para No.I(a) of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Civil Servants Promotion Policy, 2009, only provided the minimum length of service for promotion of a civil servant to become eligible for promotion but of course it was subject to recruitment rules framed by the Government for respective departments providing channel of promotion---Administration Committee in its meeting further modified the upgradation order and gave it retrospective effect---High Court had upgraded the posts of all those Private Secretaries and Readers/Superintendents (BPS-18), who had completed 12 years satisfactory service to BPS-17 and above to BPS-19---As per the mandatory terms of upgraded policy, the officers so upgraded had to stay at least l0 years in a upgraded post---Petitioner had already retired and was benefited vide Notification when he was upgraded to BPS-19, was having no right whatsoever to claim further upgradation without completion of 10 years in that scale---Constitutional petition was dismissed accordingly. Head Notes

MUHAMMAD RUSTAM vs REGISTRAR, PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR Ss — 2022 PLC(CS) 1239 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 PLC