April 2, 2006	Sunday	Rabi-ul-Awwal 3, 1427

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window).

ISLAMABAD, April 1: Revised appointment, transfer and promotion rules permit antedated promotions without assumption of charge, the Federal Services Tribunal (FST) was told on Saturday.

The tribunal comprising Chaudhry Ilyas and Tariq Farook was hearing a petition by Gulzar Ahmed Arian, a BS-19 employee of the Statistics Department.

The official was recommended for promotion to BS-20 by the Central Selection Board. However, while the promotion case was under process following recommendation by the CSB the officer retired and the department did not implement the promotion orders.

The petitioner challenged this in the FST relying on the provisions of the Estacode as well as amendment to Section 7-A of the appointment, transfer and promotion rules 1973.

The amended rules state that one can be promoted antedated without assumption of charge.

Counsel for the petitioner Ramzan Khan told the tribunal that according to FR-17, previously no one could be promoted without assuming charge, but in the new amended rules assumption of charge was not necessary.

This, he said, was specifically for retired and deceased persons.

The tribunal after hearing the arguments admitted the petition for regular hearing.

The tribunal observed that the appellant was justified in his contention and could have been promoted without assumption of charge.

Meanwhile, in a separate case, the FST bench comprising the tribunal’s chairman, Arif Chaudhry, and Abdul Hafeez stated that downgrading could not be justified during absorption.

The bench said downgrading would be unjustified and against provisions of law.

The counsel for the petitioner, Iftikar Ahmed Sial, quoted Estacode, which states that no one can be absorbed in a lesser grade if seats are not available. Besides, Removal from Service Special Ordinance has also mentioned this in its Section 11(a).

In yet another case, the FST admitted a petition filed by Farasat Ali and Sikandar Hayat against Post Office challenging their dismissal from service on basis of joint liability.

The bench comprising Tariq Farooq and Chaudhry Ilyas stated that major penalty of dismissal could not be imposed without the specification of charges alongwith documentary evidence.