PESHAWAR: The service tribunal has summoned the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly’s speaker to appear before it over failure to implement its order to cancel the promotion of a junior officer.

Tribunal member Gulzeb Khan also directed Speaker Asad Qaiser to produce a report on compliance with the order on the next hearing fixed for Feb 28.

The directions were issued during a hearing into an execution petition of additional secretary of the assembly Ghulam Sarwar, whose appointment to the secretary’s post was ordered by the tribunal after striking down the posting of a junior officer.

While deciding the appeal last year, the tribunal had declared illegal the promotion of deputy secretary Nasrullah Khan as additional secretary through a notification on Aug 18, 2007.

The tribunal had also declared illegal an order of the KP Assembly speaker of June 25, 2014, through which review petition of the appellant was dismissed.

The tribunal had ruled that the appellant was promoted as additional secretary (BPS-19) KP Assembly from the date his junior colleague (Nasrullah) was promoted as additional secretary with back benefits/ consequential benefits.

Subsequently, during the pendency of the appeal, additional secretary Nasrullah Khan was promoted as the secretary and has still been serving on that post.

In detailed judgment, the tribunal had ruled that the criteria of promotion to the higher post of the assembly’s senior additional secretary (BPS-20) and secretary (BPS-21) was also based on seniority-cum-fitness as such subsequent promotions if any of the junior colleague of the appellant to the higher post including the post of senior additional secretary or secretary, during pendency of the appeal, was also set aside as a consequential benefit.

The respondents, including the assembly’s speaker, didn’t implement the tribunal’s order saying they have challenged the decision in the Supreme Court.

During hearing into the execution petition on Thursday, the tribunal observed that the respondents, including the speaker, had filed the leave to appeal petition with the Peshawar registry of the Supreme Court and not in its main offices in Islamabad.

It observed that until now, neither any stay order had been issued by the Supreme Court nor had any date so far been fixed for regular hearing and therefore, the respondents had attempted to mislead the tribunal.

The tribunal ruled that the respondents were duty bound to implement its judgment even on provisional basis until the case was finally adjudicated in the Supreme Court.

The appellant had said he and Nasrullah were initially appointed as assistant secretaries (BPS-17) in 1993.

He said he was senior to Nasrullah (respondent No 3) and the relevant records confirmed it.

The appellant said both he and Nasrullah were promoted as deputy secretaries (BPS-18) through a notification on Feb 27, 2003, and he was placed senior to the respondent.

He added that to fill vacancy of an additional secretary, a working paper was prepared by Nasrullah recommending his own promotion in supersession of the appellant despite the fact that he was not only junior to the appellant but also earned adverse ACR in 1997.

The appellant claimed that the departmental promotion committee had unlawfully and by being influenced by the working paper appointed Nasrullah as additional secretary on Aug 18, 2007.

Published in Dawn, February 24th, 2018