ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

C.P.No.D-1360 of 2012

___________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For Katcha Peshi

14.03.2014

Petitioner is present alongwith his counsel Syed Muhammad Nehal Hashmi, adv.

Najmuddin Admn. Officer of PCSIR is present alongwith Mr.Abdul Sadiq Khan Tanoli, Standing Counsel

………

Case of petitioner is that despite holding DPC in the month of May, 2010 and December, 2011, case of petitioner was not properly considered and he was not given promotion from Grade-18 to Grade-19 though according to him, he is eligible for promotion and serving the respondent No.2 for last 23 years. DPC deferred his promotion due to some advisory remarks observed in its meeting held in the year 2010. He was informed about remarks vide Letter dated 15.07.2010 for three separate PER 2006, 2007 and 2008. Letter itself reflects that all remarks were given as advisory remarks for making improvement only. It is also matter of record that while considering promotion in 2010’s DPC, PER/ACR-2009 was not available. Learned counsel for petitioner pointed out that immediately after communicating aforesaid remarks, petitioner preferred appeal to Chairman on 06.08.2010, then he sent two reminders which were also received by department and last appeal was filed on 15.06.2011 which are available from pages No.43 to 59. On behalf of respondent No.2, comments have been filed by Najmuddin, Admn., Officer who is also present in court alongwith learned Standing Counsel. In para (ix) of comments, it is admitted that advisory remarks are not treated as adverse for the purpose of promotion. It is further stated that former Chairman of PCSIR was of the view that remarks recorded in ACR were adverse. However proposal was sent to Confidential Cell to obtain clarification of Reporting Officer regarding nature of these remarks. So far as submission of appeals is concerned, it is admitted that appeals and reminders were submitted and case was forwarded to competent committee. It is further admitted that due to some disciplinary proceeding, same could not be decided. Learned Standing Counsel also pointed out comments filed on behalf of respondent

- : 2 : -

No.2 and he submits that appeals are pending. Learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel, both, have agreed that short point is involved, the petition may be disposed of at Katcha Peshi stage.

In view of above, this petition is disposed of with the directions to Chairman of respondent No.2 to decide pending appeals of petitioner within a period of two months. He will also provide ample opportunity of hearing to petitioner and pass speaking order. Copy of this order be transmitted to Chairman of respondent No.2 for compliance.

J U D G E