Islamabad:
In an interesting development, the Apex Court has returned to the Great Power Selection Council (HPSB) the case of a retired official for him for the promotion of Proforma “of Novo”.
A Promorma promotion is a type of promotion given to an employee without change in the position, remuneration or current responsibilities, but with the intention of maintaining parity with a junior or a peer which has perhaps been promoted for structural or administrative reasons.
The Court noted that the promotion should be considered in accordance with the accuracy of the fundamental rule 17 (FR 17) – with a fair, impartial and significant consideration and deliberation of all the yield assessment reports (PERS) of the petitioner.
“The entire financial year should be completed within two months after receipt of the copy of this judgment,” said an order made by a three -member bench led by judge Muhammad Ali Mazhar.
The petitioner, Ghulam Qadir Thebo, was promoted BS-21 on April 3, 2013. However, it was replaced three times of consideration for promotion to BS-22 without attributing reason.
During the second HPSB meeting summoned on October 5, 2017, the name of the petitioner appeared in SR No 07 in the seniority list of BS-21 officers. However, the petitioner junior officers were promoted. During the third meeting, his name was at SR No 04, once again, his case was not considered by the HPSB, and two other junior officers for him were promoted.
The petitioner submitted ministerial representations to the Prime Minister of Pakistan and to the division of the establishment of secretary. However, no response was received. ‘
According to the petitioner, the refusal of promotion by the HPSB was in the midst of its fundamental rights inscribed in articles 4, 9, 10-A, 18 and 25 of the Constitution.
He subsequently filed a constitutional request before the High Court of the Sindh (SHC) in 2018.
During the suspension of the petition, the HPSB again examined the case of the petitioner and in the comments submitted by the respondents, certain allegations concerning its performance and its integrity were leveled, which were entirely outside the file.
The SHC then rejected its petition on January 27, 2022.
The SC noted that the question of eligibility is correlated with the terms and conditions of service, while the ability to promote is a subjective assessment based on an objective criterion.
“Although consideration for promotion is a right, promotion itself cannot be claimed as a right. There is no right acquired for promotion or rules determining eligibility for promotion.
“However, it may not be a view of view that an employee can, under the law / relevant rules, claim to be considered for promotion within the framework of the law, rules, regulations and prescribed policies providing promotion criteria.”
He said that SC has ruled that if a person is not considered due to a discharge, an error or administrative delay when the right to be considered for the promotion has matured, and without such consideration, he reaches the age of the retirement pension, then obviously, the avenue of the promotion of formats comes into play for his rescue.
“If he has lost his promotion because of any administrative surveillance or delay of the meeting of the DPC or the selection committee, despite the physical form, eligibility and seniority, then in all honesty, he has a legitimate expectation of Promorma promotion with consecutive advantages.
“The provision of Promotion of Proforma is not unknown or unknown to the structure of the service of civil servants, but it is already integrated in the FR 17.”