Muhammad Naveed Akhtar Vs I.G Prisons etc

iammad Naveéd Akhtar S/o Mehboob Elahi, S.V.T ,(, Peshawar.

Khalid Mehmood S/o Muhammad bin, J.V.T, BPS-6, Peshawar.

Mushtaq Ahmad S/o Abdul Hakeem, J.V.T, BPS-6, Prison Department, KPK, Peshawar.

Awal Sher S/o Bahadar Sher, J.V.T, BPS-6, Prison Department, KPK, Peshawar. Presently all are appointed at Central prison, Haripur.

...PETITIONERS

VERSUS

Inspector General of Prisons, KPK, Peshawar. Assistant Inspector General of Prisons, KPK, Peshawar. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Haripur. j Government of KPK through Secretary, Home and Tribal Affairs Department, Civil Secretariat, KPK, Peshawar.

5.. Government of KPK through Secretary Finance, Civil Secretariat, KPK, Peshawar.

...RESPONDENTS

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTlCLE 199 OF THE

CONSTITUTION OF ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN,

eTrue rt09 copy_, 1973 DECLARING PETITIONERS AT PAR WITH THEIR

COUNTERPARTS WORKING IN THE EDUCATION

DEPARTMENT, KPK, BY UPGRADING THE POSTS OF

pesholar h ts:

J\JT & SVT TO BPS-iS AND BPS-16 RESPECTIVELY IN

LINE WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF KPK EDUCATION

DEPARTMENT LETTER NO.2724/P-9/SNF/CONVERSION

DATED 27/09/1995, GOVERNMENT OF KPK, FINANCE

DEPTT PESHAVVAR LETTERS NO.FD(PRC)5-1/03 DATED

6 12/01/1995 FD/SO (FR) 10-22/2007 DATED 26/01/2008,

AND NO.SO (FR)/FD/10-22(E)/2010 DATED 26.06.2012

WITH ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS ACCRUING

THEREFROM.

Judgment Sheet

IN THE PESHA WAR HIGH q

ABBOTTABAD BENCH

JUDICIAL DEPAR TMENT

W.P.No.412-A/2014.

JUDGMENT

Date of hearing 15.11.2017

Petitioners (Muhammad Naveed Mr. Munir Ahmed Bhatii, Akhtar & others) by Advocate.

Respondents (Inspector General Mr. Yasir Zahoor Abbasi, of Prisons & others) by: Assistant A. G.

SYED ARSHAD ALl, J:- Petitioner Naveed Akhtar who is Senior Vernacular Teacher (S.V.T) in Prison Department KPK along with three others who are Junior Vernacular Teacher (J.V.T) in the Prison Department seek the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court prayed that:- _____________ "It is, therefore, humbly prayed that on EXAMjj Copy acceptance of the instant Writ Pet ition, an 05 DEC 2011 appropriate Writ may please be issued Pesbawar High Court AM. eich declaring the petitioners at par with their ithorized Under So:

counterpart working in the Education Department, by upgrading the Posts off VT& SVT to BPS-/S and BPS-16 respectively in line with the Government of KPK Education Department letter No. 2 724/P-9/SNF/ Conversion dated 27.09.1995, PD/SO

(FR)10-22/2007 dated 2601.2008 and No.

SO ('F]?)/F/1 O-22 (E)/201 0 dated 26.06.2012 with all consequential benefits accruing therefrom. Any other relief deems appropriate in the czrcu,nslances of the case and not specifically asked for may kindly be granted."

2.Brief but the essential facts of the case are that petitioner Muhammad Naveed was appointed as Senior Vernacular Teacher/S.V.T (BPS-OS), vide appointment order dated 21.01.2006 by the Inspector General of Prisons. Similarly, petitioner Khal id Mehmood was appointed as J.V.T (BPS-6) vide appointment order dated 16.06.2007, Mr. Mushtaq Ahmed petitioner was appointed as J.V.T (BPS-6) vide appointment order dated 21.0 1.2006, whereas Awal Slier was appointed as J.V.T - (B.P.S-6) vide appointment letter dated 21.10.1985 by the !u LU lie IIUC •J1JJ1 EXAMINER i Inspector General of Prisons (then NWFP). All the 05 DEC 2031 17' petitioners are working in the same pay scale and in the Peshawar High coudwicJ ithorized Under Se: 15 EM same cadre in which they were appointed till today without any prospects of proniotion or service structure for further promotion in their cadre. Against that the civil servants who were workiiig in the education department Khyber Pak.htunkhwa against the post of S.V, their nomenclature/ post was merged/converted into C.T posts. Similarly, the

posts of J.V were converted into P.T.C. i'hereafier, the Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa had time and again upgraded the posts of P.T.0 and C.T. number of times.

Through notification dated 26.01.2008, the Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa had upgraded the post of Primary School Teacher from I3PS-7 to BPS-9 and the post of C.T from BPS-9 to BPS-iS. Similarly, through notification dated 26.06.2012, the government of .Khyber Pakhtunkhwa had further upgraded the posts of Primary School Teacher to 13S-15 and the post of C.T to 135-16.

I

The petitioner has also placed on record letter dated 17.07.2008, whereby various posts were created in the Borstal Institute Bannu including the posts of C.T. teacher in BPS-12 and PST Teacher BPS-9. In line with the policy of the Education I)epartment of Provincial Government to of posts, the then Superintendent, Central 05 DEC,p( Jrison Haripur through letter dated 27.06.2008, rcquestcd the Inspector General of Prisons, NWFP, Peshawar for conversion of S.V Post to C.T. Post, but till date no action has been taken on the same. Similarly, on 29.08.2009, the then Assistant Inspector General of Prisons forwarded the detailed working paper prepared by the Deputy Secretary.

Prisons, Home & Triable Affairs I)epartment, Peshawar,

regarding the upgradation of four S.V teachers, six JV teachers and nineteen Diniyal teachers who were working in various jails of the province for their upgradation. It was affirmed in the said working paper that the provincial government has allowed upgradation of certain posts in the then NWFP Education Department vide Finance Department (Regulation Wing) Notification. dated 26.01.2008. Flowever, the same upgradation has so far not been allowed to the incumbents of similar posts similarly duties with similar qualifications in U 5 Ut Prisons Departnnt. it was also urged that the disparity peshawaf WgP Uoufl ow" and discrimination may be removed with the following proposal:-

5# Nomenclature Present Proposed Proposed Additional Upgraded of the post Pay Nomenclature Pay Qualification scale (One Scale Scale ________________ time) S.V Teacher 8 ci 9 13A/BsC and trained 15 teacher J.V Teacher 6 Primary 7 FA/FSc and 9 ii- School trained, teacher Teacher (PS'l') Having 10 years 12 service iii- Religious 6 Religious 7 l-lafiz-e-Quran with 12 Teacher Teacher ssc

1-lowever, the said working paper till date is lying in the cold storage of the respondent department. Feeling aggrieved of the discriminatory treatment, the prcsent lb petitioners had earlier filed WP No. 431 of 2008 which came up for hearing before this Court on 11.11.2008. On

the said date of hearing, the then learned A.A.G requested for one month time to redress the grievances of the petitioner, hence, in view of the statement and assurance given by the then learned AAG, the petitioner withdrew the said petition.,

The respondents filed their comments

wherein they have stated that in compliance of the order of this Court, a high level meeting of the officials of Home Department was held on 26.03.2013 wherein it was decided, "it was held that the case of upw'adation 91 teachers of Prison Department was very week and not tenable to be presented before the upgrac/ation committee"

Arguments heard and record perused.

EXAMNER

5.It is evident from the working paper of the

U 5 DEC

Peshawarf4{ghCrt4tflth respondent wherein they have affirmed that the present petitioners are performing the same functions of C.1' teacher and P.T.0 l'eacher having the same qualification and job description. The respondents in their comments have not denied this fact nor pleaded that the petitioners lacks the essential qualification for the post of P'I'C and C.T. When there exists no difference in the qualifications of the present petitioners for the posts of C.T./P.T.C, their

duties, frmnctions and responsibility, then denying to theni similar treatmentiperk and privileges, as available to other set of employees, who are working in education department, would obviously offend the principle of equality before law as envisaged by Article 4, Article 8 (3)(b) and Article 25 (2) (3) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan which guarantees in unequivocal terms equal treatment amongst equals and persons and things similarly situated and circumstanced. It is by now well settled principle of law that the equal treatnient to its citizens is the onerous duty of the government ithposed by the constitution being the supreme law of the land which otherwise is a hallmark of good governance.

6.The record shows that the petitioners have been striving and struggling for their rights not claim upgradation of their posts on their own whims and wishes but at par with the parameters set by the Government of KPK for other set of employees who are similarly placed having the same qualification and performing the same duties. The record further shows that the respondents have even failed to give single reason for not providing them

their due rights. In "Fayyaz All and 7 others Vs.

Province of Sindli, 2013 PLC (C.S) 592", it was held:- "Learned counsel referred to judgment of Supreme Court in the case ofAbdul Shakoor V. Government of Pakistan through Secretary, Establishment Division, Jslamabad and 2 others (C.P.No. 40 of] 999). The petition related to employee of Customs, Central Excise and Sales Tax Department who sought removal of disparity and discrimination in pay S scales in services of Pakistan as being violative of various Articles of the Constitution of the Islamic Republici of Pakistan. After exhaustive analysis of case-law the Supreme Court observed as under:--- "From the above quoted cases, it can be deduced that persons holding sinular posts with similar duties should not be treated d(ferentiv in their pay scales simply for the reason that they belong to dafffèi'ent departments.

Uhder Articles 37 and 38 of the Constitution of Pakistan, the State is bound erti&d to be True Copy EXAMINER to promote social justice, social and 05 Lu ZUil

Peshawar High Court At erich F economic well being of the people and particularly under clause (e) of Article 38 it is the obligation of' the State to reduce ithorized Under Se: 75 EvtdOrS' disparity• in the income and earnings of individuals, including persons in various classes of the service of Pakistan, thus, it is the duty of the State to remove disparity and discrimination in Pay Scales of similarly placed persons in various classes of' service 4/ of Pakistan.

The aforementioned view was also affirmed by the learned Lahore 1-ugh Court in "Muhammad Idrees and 6 others vs. Federation of Pakistan, 20156 PLC (C.S) 183"

7.In view of the above, this petiti&i is allowed.

The petitioners are ordered to be given the same grade and treatment as has been given to the similarly placed employees of the Provincial Government (Education Department) as reflected in the working paper of respondents mentioned in Para 2 above.

Announced Dt.15.11.2017. JUDGE

JUDGE

Ahab PS' .Ju.ciiccs S,wd /vbd,a,n,nad All/qua Slial, and Sjvd A,.vl,ud All.

Certii%ed to be Tm' EXAMiNER

rr' 05 Dc.0 üi

Peshawar High Ceupt%.

lAuthOTized Under SeJSE