IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, SUKKUR BENCH, SUKKUR

C.P No.D-383 of 2011

Before:

Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar

Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi

Petitioner: Qazi Sattar Ahmed @ Abdul Sattar through Mr. Sarfraz A. Akhund, advocate

HESCO: through Mr. Sohail Ahmed Khoso, advocate

SEPCO: through Mr. Qurban Ali Malano

State: Through Mr. Muhammad Hamzo Buriro, DAG

Date of hearing: 13.01.2022

Date of decision: 13.01.2022

O R D E R

Zulfiqar Ali Sangi, J: Through this petition, the Petitioner seeks following reliefs:-

a) To declare that the Act of Respondent No.1 and 2 while not giving the move over, to the petitioner from BPS-17 to BPS-18 is illegal, nullity in the eye of law and violation of fundamental rights as envisaged in the Constitution.

b) To declare that the act of Respondent No.3 not allowing the full grass pensions and other benefits to the petitioner is illegal and un-constitutional.

c) To direct the Respondent No.2, to allow the move over to the petitioner from BPS-17 to BPS-18 with effect from 1998 and award all due pension, benefits and due increments.”

2. Succinct facts of the case are that the Petitioner was appointed by Chief Engineer Operation Region, Hyderabad, as Sub-Station Operator (BPS-12) and was posted at SS&T (Sub-Station and Transmission) Rohri Division; that in the year, 1998 WAPDA was divided in different companies; that WAPDA authorities invited their employees whether they wish to remain in WAPDA or other companies; however the Petitioner agreed to continue his service in HESCO. In the year, 1983 the petitioner was selected and allowed selection grade of BPS-16 by the WAPDA authorities after considering the case of Petitioner and in the year, 1993 the petitioner was allowed move over from BPS-16 to 17 by the Respondent No.1 and the petitioner was promoted as Junior Engineer in BPS-17 vide order dated 16.01.1997. It is alleged in the petition that the Respondent No.1 with ulterior motive and malafide intention, issued office order dated 03.12.2002, whereby the officers who were working under BPS-17 were allowed move over from BPS-17 to BPS-18 by ignoring the petitioner. The petitioner completed his five years in BPS-17 in the year 1999 and become entitled for move over from BPS-17 to BPS-18. It is further alleged in the petition that during entire period no any complaint whatsoever has been registered against the petitioner nor even in the ACRs anything has been mentioned about the conduct in discharging the duties. The petitioner on superannuation has been retired; however since then neither he has been awarded move over grade nor full pension, hence this petition.

3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, at the very outset, submits that the Petitioner is entitled for move over grade as per his service record; however Respondents with malafide intention and ulterior motives did not award move over grade to the Petitioner inspite of completion of successful service in grade-17; that junior officers to the Petitioner have been granted move over grade from BPS-17 & 18 but the request of the Petitioner was declined without assigning any reason or justification; that the petitioner has been retired from his services on his superannuation but the Petitioner was not awarded such relief; besides his pension has also been retained to 80%, which act on the part of Respondents seems to be illegal and unlawful.

4. Mr. Suhail Ahmed Khoso, Advocate for respondent contended that as per guideline for considering cases of move over of employees in BPS 16 to BPS 19 dated: 6-7-1986, 05 years length in service is required and the petitioner was promoted in BPS 17 on 21-01-1997 and his 05 years were completed on 20-01-2002 ; that the facility of move over was discontinued by the authority w.e.f. 04-09-2001, vide office Memorandum No: F-O (B&F/10-126/BPS-2001/1881-2080), dated: 20-11-2001, therefore the petitioner was not entitled for the move over as claimed in this petition and move over was rightly not allowed to him. Lastly, he submits that the petition may be dismissed.

5. Mr. Malano and learned DAG adopted the arguments of Mr. Suhail Ahmed Khoso and contended that the petitioner is not entitled for the relief claimed therefore the petition may be dismissed.

6. We have learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on record with their able assistance.

7. From material available on record it reflects that the petitioner was appointed vide appointment latter dated: 11-05-1974 as (SSO-I) Sub-Station Operator-I. His service was placed in BPS-16 vide office order dated: 8-5-1985 w.e.f 11-10-1983. The move over from BPS-16 to 17 was granted to the petitioner vide office order dated: 17-02-1998 with effect from 01-12-1993. However, the regular promotion was allowed to the petitioner vide office order dated: 16-1-1997 and his name was placed at Sr. No. 3 and the name of one Mr. S. Abid Hussain Bukhari is also available at Sr. No. 12, who thereafter was granted move over from BPS-17 to 18.

8. We have also considered the decision of authority on an application/appeal filed by the petitioner for grant of move over the same is re-produced as under:-

Qazi Abdul Sattar

Resident Engineer,

132 KV Grid Station HESCO

N’ Feroze

Subject:- APPEAL FOR GRANT OF MOVE-OVER

Ref: Your application dated 10.09.2009

It is intimated that you have already been informed vide this office letter No.CEO/HESCO/M(HRM)/HQ/CM/48490 dated 02.09.2009 that as per Para-04 of guidelines for considering cases of Move-over of employees in (BPS-16) to (BPS-19) dated 06.07.1986, officers having completed 05 years length of service in (BPS-17) are eligible for Move-over in (BPS-18).

You were promoted from SSO-I (BPS-16) to Junior Engineer (BPS-17) on 21.01.1997, your 05 years length of service in (BPS-17) completed on 20.01.2002 whereas, the facility of Move-over was discontinued by the Authority w.e.f. 04.09.2001.

In view of the above, your request for allowing Move-over w.e.f 01.12.1998 is regretted being not admissible under the rules.

This issues with the approval of Director HR & Admn HESCO Hyderabad.

Sd/

(AHMED SAEED SOLANGI)

DY. MANAGER (TMP-I)

HESCO HYDERABAD

9. The para-8 of the office memorandum dated: 20-11-2001 relied by the counsel for the Respondents is carefully examined and the same is reproduced as under:-

Para-8: The facility of Move Over to next higher scale and that of Selection Grade has been dis-continued w-e-f 4-9-2001. Neither types of the cases to be effective on or after 4-9-2001 will be considered. However, those eligible for Move Over or Selection Grade before the said date will be considered in the light of relevant rules.

From the perusal of above para-8 of the memorandum ibid, it is very much clear that the cases of the employees which were already eligible were to be decided as per the rules which were already followed. Since the petitioner was granted Move Over from BPS-16 to 17 vide office order dated: 17-02-1998 with effect from 01-12-1993, therefore, in our view the petitioner after 05 years was entitled for the next Move Over as per the guide lines dated: 6-7-1986, discussed above.

10. Resultantly the petition is allowed; the Respondents are directed to consider the case of petitioner a fresh in the light of above discussion within three months from the date of this order.

11. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

J U D G E

J U D G E