LAHORE, July 16: Taking a strong exception to out-of-turn promotions in the Parks and Horticulture Authority, Lahore High Court judge Justice Hafiz Tariq Naseem on Wednesday directed the Punjab chief secretary to take action against those responsible for illegally promoting officials.

The judge held PHA Director Coordination Zareef Iqbal Satti and his associates responsible for making illegal appointments.

Seven PHA BPS-5 officials -- Shujauddin, Muhammad Iftikhar, Javed Ahmed, Abid Jilani, Muhammad Saqlain Raza, Naseer Ahmed and Sayyed Sohail Hussain -- had moved court against out-of-turn promotions.

They said their higher-ups had promoted their juniors from BPS-1 to 16 on the basis of personal liking. Shafiq Raza was promoted from BPS-1 to 16, Khwaja Abbas from BPS-5 to 14, Akmal Ijaz from BPS-1 to 14, Ghulam Mustafa from BPS-1 to 14 and Muhammad Anjum from BPS-5 to 16. Before ordering action, Justice Hafiz Tariq Nasim had asked the PHA to appoint an inquiry officer to probe illegal promotions. Riaz Ahmad Qureshi, assistant director (administration), had held the inquiry and submitted his report in court.

The judge directed the PHA DG to constitute a promotion committee to assess the cases of promotion, including that of the petitioners’ within two months. The judge ruled that till Sept 9, the five respondents could serve on their positions and in case the PHA failed to meet the deadline for promotions, these postings would be considered vacant.

The judge ruled that every government department was bound to ensure that the true process of law was adopted in promotion.

Authorities should not extend discretionary favours towards its favourite employees, he said.

The petitioners said they were regular employees and experienced workers but the PHA DG, the director administration and the engineering supervisor illegally promoted the above mentioned employees on Sept 21, 2007. They further submitted that the authorities did not make these promotions public.

They said they also asked the DG about alleged nepotism, but he did not take any action. They added they were deprived of their right to be promoted as their juniors, whose work they had been supervising, were promoted above them.

They requested that these promotions might be quashed and the DG asked to state that under what rules he granted these promotions. They further prayed that the DG be directed to consider them for promotion with effect from the same date their juniors had been promoted.