Resolved Cases Series: Matter involving Promotion of Civil Servant in Pakistan.
Case Resolved: Petitioner’s Promotion Matter
In June 2016, the client, a dedicated Director (BS-20) with a prominent federal institution, approached Josh and Mak International seeking assistance with a promotion matter. He was aggrieved as six junior officers were promoted to BS-21, while he was ignored and superseded. Despite his outstanding performance, he had not been considered for the promotion.
We began by gathering relevant evidence and facts to present a strong case for our client’s promotion. The petitioner’s career history showcased his devotion to duty and exceptional service. He had joined the Civil Services Academy in 1980 and progressed through various roles, displaying commendable performance in each position. The client had received cash awards for detecting tax frauds, achieving targets, and rendering meritorious service.
Our research revealed that the promotion of the six respondents was based on a seniority list from 2011, which had been set aside by the Federal Service Tribunal, making their promotion void ab initio. Additionally, the client, being senior to the respondents, was unfairly superseded without any valid reason, while his juniors were promoted for personal reasons.
We argued that the petitioner’s supersession without providing reasons was a violation of Section 24-A of the General Clauses Act and his fundamental rights under the Constitution. The promotion process, which allocated marks for service record and evaluation by the Central Selection Board (CSB), displayed malafide intent as the petitioner’s marks were disproportionate to his service record.
The petitioner’s exceptional 31-year unblemished service record and varied experience in different positions further highlighted his suitability for promotion. He had held key roles, including Chief Commissioner, a position rarely given to competent officers. The client’s performance had been recognized with meritorious awards and rewards during his postings.
We emphasized that the petitioner’s experience far exceeded that of his junior officers who were promoted. While some of them had never worked outside their home station, the petitioner had served in various cities, showing his willingness to accept challenging assignments.
Furthermore, we presented an incident from 1986 when the petitioner, at great personal risk, protected government records during a dacoity at the Income Tax Office in Bahawalpur. This incident showcased his dedication to duty and service beyond the call of duty.
Based on the evidence presented, it becomes evident that none of the promoted officers have experiences similar to the petitioner. The petitioner has held unique and challenging postings, which were not given to the promoted officers. He remained posted as Commissioner in BS-19 for three years, whereas the promoted officers did not hold such positions. Additionally, the petitioner served as Chief Commissioner for two consecutive years, a feat not achieved by most of the promoted officers.
The questions that arise from this situation are:
- Why has the petitioner been declared incompetent when he currently holds an important and challenging post as Director Intelligence & Investigation by the FBR?
- Why was the petitioner declared “incompetent” in October 2011 when he had received a cash reward for his competence just a month earlier?
- Why were the officers junior to the petitioner, with less experience and exposure, awarded more marks than him in the evaluation by the CSB?
In our submission to the court, we emphasized that the awarding of marks by the CSB to the petitioner was arbitrary and a result of malafide intent. Superseding the petitioner was unjustified and illegal, violating his fundamental rights under the Constitution. We requested the court’s intervention to rectify this injustice and uphold the petitioner’s service rights.
We prayed that the court declares the petitioner’s supersession as malafide, arbitrary, and of no legal consequence. We sought the court’s direction to the CSB and FBR to reconsider the petitioner’s promotion in the next CSB meeting, in line with the date of promotion of his juniors.
The points of law presented in the petition were based on the relevant provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan and the Civil Servants Act, 1973.
As a result of this petition, the court found in favor of the aggrieved party and ordered his promotion based on the evidence and arguments presented.
In conclusion, our comprehensive presentation and strong arguments convinced the court of the petitioner’s eligibility and competence for promotion. The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, directing his promotion to BS-21, recognizing his outstanding service and contributions to the government. The successful resolution of this case demonstrates our expertise in handling promotion matters and protecting the rights of our clients in the legal arena.If you are facing a similar situation in the Pakistan Civil Service, our team at Josh and Mak International is here to provide you with affordable legal assistance. We can help you ensure that any injustices done to you regarding promotion are rectified through the proper legal channels. Don’t hesitate to reach out to us for guidance and support in your promotion matter.
