Khana-e-Kaba

Khana-e-Kaba

Thursday, February 17, 2011

BEFORE THE FEDERAL SERVICE TRIBUNAL ISLAMABAD

1. Khalid Riaz Stenographer BPS-15 Appellant

VS
1. CGA 2. AG KPK 3. Estab Divn Respondents.

4. Finance Division

APPEAL

FOR UP-GRADATION OF POSTS OF STENOTYPISTS, STENOGRAPHERS AND PRIVATE SECRETARIES IN THE AUIDT AND ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT AGAINST WHICH THE APPELLANT PREFFERED DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL DATED 29.03.2010 WHICH WAS DULY FORWARDED TO RESPONDENT NO.1 VIDE LETTER DATED 30.03.2010 WHICH HAS NOT BEEN RESPONDED WITHIN THE STATUTORY PERIOD OF 90 DAYS. HENCE THIS APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAY .

PRAYER IN APPEAL
It is humbly prayed before this Honourable Tribunal to accept this appeal and direct the respondents to process the case of the appellant for up-gradation of the post of Stenographer from BPS15/16 to BPS-17 in the interest of Justice equity and fairness.

Respectfully Sheweth,

FACTS
-That the Appellant joined the respondents organization on 31.12.88 as Junior Auditor (BPS-5). The Appellant apointed as Steno typist (B-12) on 14.3.90. The appellant was further promoted as stenographer (B-15) on 19.10.2009. The appellant has unblemished and clean track of serive record for 22 years.

-That in Audit and Accounts Department Steno-typist B-12, Stenographer B-15 and Private Secretaries B-17 among others categories of employees are also working. The up-gradation of these posts was also recommended to the Controller General of Accounts Islamabad alongwith upgradation of post of Junior, Senior Auditors, AAOs and Accounts Officer. An appeal the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad upgraded the following posts in 2009 and the Supreme Court Pakistan upheld the decion in 2010, the decision for the up-gradation of these posts by Federal Service Tribunal in Pakistan Audit and Accounts Department is as under:
1. Junior Aduitor B-7 to B-11
2. Senior Aduitor B-14 to B-16
3. Assistant Accounts Officer B-16 to B-17
4. Audit/Accounts Officer B-17 to B-18
5. Stenotypist B-12 Not upgraded
6. Stenographer B-15/16 Not upgraded
7. Private Secretary B-17 not upgraded

The up-gradation of posts of steno typist, stenographers and Private Secretary were ignored. As a result discontentment/frustration was created which is common fact among them. As a fact the Stenotypists, Stenographer and Private Secretaries are equally responsible for the objective of the working of all the offices in Pakistan Audit and Accounts Department. On up-gradation of the post of AGPR islamabad, all Provincial Accountants General posts were upgraded to BPS-21 respectively . As such the work load on Stenotypists, Stenographer and Private Secretraries has also increased correspondingly. There fore, it was essential to conside4r the post of Stenographer for upgradation for the sake of consistency and to remove discrimination between the employees working in the different department as enshrined in Art, 37 and 38 of the Consititution of Islamic Repulbic of pakistan, 1973, which lays down that the economic disparity between the persons employed on similar work should be reduced.

-That the post of Stenograpfhers/Stenotypists were given joint seniority with Audit and Accounts Assistants B-11 Now Senior Auditors upgraded to B-16 for the purpose of promotion as Accountants B-16 Now B-17 against 33% quota on the basis of seniority cum fitness. But later on promotion of Assistant Accounts Officer against 33% quota was abolished. Selection Grade in any case had been abolished with effect from 01.12.2001. Obviously, they remain no incentive for stenotypists, Stenographer and Private Secretaries leaving them with no further chances for carrier advancement.

-That as regard to the work load of the said officials it is pointed out that District Accounts Officers and Agencies Account Officers in 24 district of Khyber Pakhtun khwa and senven agencies of FATA were established in March 1970 for the puprose of payment of salaries/pension and to maintain G.P.Fund Accounts of all Governmetn servants serving there. The Accountant General and other Supervisory Officers of the same level to contact the offices on telephone to collect the official information resulting addtional work load on stentypist, stenographers and private secretaires.

-That PIFRA has also been introduced and all the District Accounts Officers and certain Agency Accounts Offices have been computerised againt the Stenographers and Stenotypist have to arrange to contact the DAOs/AAOs to collect information about PIFRA.

-With devolution of contacts of AG and superviosry officers with DAOs through Stenotypist, Stenographer and Private Secretaries has increased.

-That with expansion of development activities in all offices of Provincial Government as well as District Government, Establishment of DAOs/AAOs in all District/Agency in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, introduction of PIFRA, computerization of Accounts and pay rolls and devolution the work load on Stenotypist, stenographer and Private Secretaires has also increased and is of multifarious nature.

-That following preedents of upgradation/promotion to next higher scale are quoted below for kind perusal.

Election Commission
Pakistna Railway
Lahore High Court
Worker Welfare Board

-That due to upgradation of the posts of Junior Auditor, Senior Auditor , the senotypist/ stenographer became junior/inferior because before of upgradation, the stenotypists were in B-12 while senior auditors in BPS-11, Stenographers were in BPS-15 while Senior Auditors were in BPS-14. Now Senior Auditors upgraded to BPS-16 while the Stenographer in BPS-15.

-The aggrieved of the unfair and discriminatory treatment meted out to the appellant has stenographer in respect of his pay scale where he has to perform more arduous and heavy work to perform, he preferred a departmental appeal to the respondent No.2 giving an elaborate and detail account of his grievances as to how he was treated unfairly and discriminatory in the matter of his career advancement. The departmental appeal dated 29.03.3.2010 alongwith the covering letter.

-That the respondent No.1 took up the case of upgradation with the respondent No.4 mentioning the contents of the respresentation in that regard of the concerned employees of AG office. The letter dated 27.4.2010 in that regard.

-That the Finance Dvision Regulation wing replied that the cases regarding upgradation/re-designation of posts are examined and decided in the light of policy issued by the Establishement Division vide OM NO.8/36/RI/2000 dated 20.01.2001. It was advised to take up the case iwth the Establishment Division in term of para 3 of the said policy and then submitted to Finance Division after having the concurrence of that division.

-That the matter of upgradation was teken up with the Estalbishment Division but no outcome has been so far has been communicated to the Appellant. In the circumstance, the Appeallant has approach this Honourable Tribunal for an appropriate remedy within 30 days of the lapse of statutory period of 90 days.

GROUNDS

That the appeallant is a stenographer B-15 where his further carrer advancement is blocked at that stage. it would be unjust and discriminatory that when better career opportunity are availabe who has been already being placed in better grades, the appellant has been lfef tin same grade without given the benefit of upgradation. When venues of career advancement in the similar cadre are available, it would be against ehe all norms of service, justice and equity to deprive the appellant of the advancement of career. Obviously, the further advancement in his career is likely to be blocked if the situation is not improved by upgradation as it would negate the principle of legitimate expectancy when civil servants employed in the other organizations working on the same job have all the opportunities for the career advancement.

That the constitutional system of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan attaches far most importance in the administration of matters relating to the appointment and career building of ciivl servants, who are required to perform important duties in public interest. Refusal of opportunity of career advancement indefinite period oin one of the government department is against all norms of service, justice, equity , good concious and fair play. It negates the principle of legitimate expectancy, where a civil servant is left to rotten in one grade for the rest of his career without any fault on his part in ta particular department whereas others employed on the same and specific duties enjoy all rights for their career advancement. It is not only discriminatory butr also against Article 37 and 38 of the Constituition of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 where it has been envisaged that the State is bound to promote social justice and economic well being of the people. Particularly, under Clause (e) of Article 35 it has been made obligatory to the State to reduce disparity in the income and earning of individuals including person in various classes of the service of Pakistan by providing equal opportunities to all for their career advancement. The government has ample power to act in aid to justice to remove iniquitous treatment meted out to a civil servant. An unjust treatment to a civil servant is injurious to congenial atmosphere in a n organization. It is likely to generate personal rivalries, frustration and consequential inefficiency.

-That treatment of civil servants in accordance with law and in just and fair manner in the matter of advancement of their career is of permanent importance for good governance. Otherwise, his commitment to the job, dedication to duty, his power to take decision and even his integrity might be confined to a casualty Ward. [Reliance is placed on 2004 (Serivce)49].

That it has been held in a case reported as PLJ 2005 SC 435, that, Government of Pakistan would secure well being of people by raising their standard of living and by ensuring equal adjustment of rights between employers and employees and providing all citizens within available resources of country facilities for work and adequate livelihood and reduce disparity in income and earing of the individual. When the Draftsmen in other deparment have been provided with the opportunity of further advancement in career, the refusal to the appellant who is employed on the same job with excellent service credentials is not justified.

That it is beyond any reasonable comprehension that persons working in different departments of the Government, employed and performing similar type of duties in all respect should be discriminated in the matter of the advancement in career, which ultimately would result in disparity of status and financial benefits. This not only falls within discrimination but also negate the spirit of Art. 37 and 38 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, which ensures that the disparity in income of the citizen of Pakistan working on the same jobs in order to maintain a harmony and equal treatment.


That in view of all the factors, the stenotypist, stenographer and Private Secretaies in Pakistan Audit and Accounts Department deserve upgradation to B-16,17 and 18 due to the tremendous increase in their work and to bring them at par with other employees performing more or less the similar functions the same for smooth functioning of the official work.

That the matter pertains to the terms and conditons of service for the determination of the right of a civil servant to serve in a higher grade opportunities of career advancement existed. This Honourable Tribunal has the power to determine the matter by evaluating the existing recruitment rules vis-a-vis other similar organizations to ensure that no discriminatory treatment was meted out to the appellant. disparity is another factor to be determined, if any, between the appellant and other civil servants perorming the same job. It has been held in a case reported as 2003 PLC(CS)619 that Service Tribunal having the function of a civil court and substitute for High Court under Article 212 of the Constituion could declare the law ultra vires of invalid. Similarly, it has been held in a case reported as 2002 PLC(CS)394, that, "Service Tribuanl is competent to go into vires of statutes or the statutory rules", Therefore, the matter of entitlement to work in a higher grade where it is felt necessary to upgrade a post commensurating with the experience and qualification is a matter falling within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Tribunal.


-There is no cavil that there can be and there are different grades in a service, with varying qualificatiions for entry into a particular grade, the higher grade often been a promotional avenue for the official of thje lower grade. The higher qualification for the higer grade, which may either be academic qualification of experience based on length of service, reasonably sustained the classification of the officials into different groups with different pay scales. The principle of equal pay for equa work is not expressly declared by our Constitution to be a fundamental right but it certainly is a Constitutional goal, which should be properly applied to cases of equal pay for equal work. It has been held in the case of D.S Nakara and others V. Union of India (AIR 1983 SC 130), where it was held by the Indian Supreme Court that, "Where all relevant considerations are the same, persons holding identical posts may not be treated differently in the matter of their grades/pay scales simply for the reasons that they belong to different departments. Therefore, the appellant deserves to be promoted/upgraded to BPS-17 and thereafter to 18 for the further advancement to the next higher grades.

-That the department like PTCL when found that a deserving civil servant was not provided with the line of promotion, the upgradation to such persons were even allowed by the department itself. The Inter Office memo of the PTCL dated 18.8.2005.

That it has been held by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in a case reported as 2003 SCMR 318, that, "Technicalities not to create hurdle in the way of justice. System giving effect to the form and not to the substance defeats substantial right. Heavy duty is cast on the courts to do substantial justice and not to deny the same on mere technicalities". The appellant with such a long unblemished service record should not be denied the promotion/upgradation when the other organizations have ample opportunities for career advancement for the same and specific job.

-That is is beyond any reasonable comprehension that persons working in a different departments of the Government, employed and performing similar type of duty in all respect should be discriminated in the matter of the advancement in career, which ultimately would result in disparity of status and financial benefits. This not only falls within discrimination but also negate the spirit of Art.37 and 38 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973, which ensures that the disparity in income of the citizen of Pakistan working on the same jobs in order to maintain a harmony and equal treatment. Therefore, in view of all the factors, the Steno Typist, Stenographer and Private Secretaries in Pakistan Audit and Accounts Department deserve upgradation to BPS-16, 17, and 18 due to the tremendous increase in their work and to bring them at par with others employees performing more or less the similar functions the same for smooth functioning of the official work.


Dated: 10.08.2010

Khalid Riaz
Appellant

THROUGH


(HAIDER HUSSAIN)
ADVOCATE SUPREME COURT


5 comments:

  1. I am so so much thankful to Mr. Khalid Riaz, Appellant & also Mr. Haider Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court of Pakistan. Because you both thinked about up-gradation of Stenographers & Stenotypists.

    Best Regards,
    DANIYAL BAIG MUGHAL
    daniyalpa@hotmail.com

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. May Allah bless Mr Haider Hussain,s soul (Ameen). He was no wonder a very great man and will be sadly missed.

      Delete
  2. Thanks to Mr Khalid Riaz and His Company that is supporting for the up-gradation case of Steno Typist and Stenographers.



    Best Regards

    ReplyDelete
  3. visit
    www.punjabservicetribunal.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  4. It is very regretful to say that computer allowance was not allowed to the Stenos, despite they are running computer. It is my example that I am steno, but I am working as computer operator whole the day. I compose nearly 30 to 40 letters every day in MS-Word or MS-Excel. But no fruitful result in shape of computer allowance have been allowed to me. Is it justice? who care about this? All stenos are requested to pressurize Government to allow computer allowance to stenos.
    Naveed Soomro

    ReplyDelete

WIDGETS

bloguez.com