ISLAMABAD: The promotion of around 350 top bureaucrats to grades 20 and 21, selected by the Central Selection Board (CSB) in August, is facing inordinate delays amid legal questions over the scrutiny mechanism.

The CSB, led by the chairperson of the Federal Public Service Com­mission (FPSC), is empowered to promote officers of the civil service from basic pay scales (BPS) 19 to 20 and from 20 to 21 through a twice-a-year exercise under the rules.

The board comprises federal secretaries of cabinet and establishment divisions, four other federal secretaries — with domiciles each from the four provinces — and four provincial chief secretaries. Two members of parliament, one each from the Senate and the National Assembly, are also part of the board.

It held a series of meetings in the second week of August and recommended promotions of nearly 350 civil servants of different occupational groups, but its recommendations have not been approved by the prime minister so far. There­fore, the notifications for these promotions could not be issued because all these cases and related legal matters are now under scrutiny at the Prime Minister’s Office, a senior government official told Dawn.

Delay caused by questions over discretion, merit

Informed sources said the validity of CSB’s recommendations for promotions had weak legal standing because the process did not follow rules and laws governing civil service promotions.

They claimed that various FPSC chairpersons and secretaries of the Establishment Division, who play a major role in promotions, have been ignoring the promotion law, which envisaged promotions to posts in BPS 19 and above exclusively on merit. Instead, they have allegedly been following an unlawful practice of promoting officers largely based on the CSB’s discretion instead of institutional merit.

Officials explained that the government had amended the Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules of 1973 on July 25, 1998 through a statutory regulatory order — SRO 850(I)/98 — making departmental examination mandatory for promotions to posts in BPS 17 to 22.

The amended Rule 8-A now reads: “No promotion on a regular basis shall be made to posts in basic pay scales 17 to 22 and equivalent unless the officer concerned has completed such minimum length of service, attended such training and passed such a departmental examination, as may be prescribed from time to time.”

The insertion of the word ‘and’ before departmental examination left no discretion with the Establishment Division to omit the exam condition while promoting officers.

Similarly, Section 9(2) of the Civil Servants Act of 1973 envisaged promotions to posts in basic pay scales 19 and above exclusively on merit. The conditions for promotion listed in the rules of 1973, including the exam condition, all further and promote merit-based promotions envisaged in the Civil Servants Act and make the eligibility for promotion objectively measurable.

Later, through another amendment to the Federal Public Service Commission Ordinance of 1977, a section — 7(1c) — was inserted in the 2002 ordinance to empower the FPSC to conduct the departmental examinations for promotions in the civil service. That new section also left no discretion with the federal government to omit the condition of departmental examination for promotion.

The federal government only had the discretion to specify the posts, which then required departmental examination for promotion. This discretion became practically infructuous by the president’s specification in Rule 8-A of posts in basic scales 17 to 22, which required exams.

The sources pointed out that by placing 30 marks for promotion, which truly and legally belonged to departmental examination, in the hands of CSB, the Establishment Division killed the concept of merit for promotion as envisaged in Section 9(2) of the Civil Servants Act and instead promoted and advanced the concept of CSB’s discretion in civil service promotions in violation of the express provisions of the law.

Rule 18(3b) of the Promotion Rules of 2019 places 30 discretionary marks for promotion in the hands of the CSB. The 2019 rules do not repeal the 1973 rules, where Rule 8-A expressly requires a departmental examination for promotions and implies the shifting of 30 marks presently in the hands of CSB to merit earned through exams.

Interestingly, both Rule 8-A of 1973 and Rule 18(3b) of 2019 comes under the Civil Servants Act of 1973. While the former furthers the purpose of merit envisaged in the act, the latter defeats this purpose and is thus ultra vires (beyond the powers) — actions taken by government bodies that exceed the scope of power given to them by laws.

Still, the CSB has preferred to go for Rule 18(3b), which gives it king-making discretion in promotions, while ignoring Rule 8-A, which brings transparency and merit — something that has become a subject of controversy this time around.

Published in Dawn, November 7th, 2022