ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE

1. For orders on C.M.A. No. 9350/2012

2. For orders on C.M.A. No. 9351/2012

03.05.2012

Mr. Malik Naeem Iqbal, advocate for the petitioner.

1. Granted.

2. Through this application under section 12(2) CPC, the petitioner has challenged order dated 26.04.2012. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 26.4.2012 was passed by this Court on the respondents concealing the facts from this Court that ten (10) officers have been working on “acting charge basis” and the petitioner can be considered for any of the said posts.

Before proceeding any further, it is necessary to mention that on 19^th March 2012, this petition was disposed of through a consent order in terms whereof the respondent No. 2 was directed to consider the petitioner for promotion in the next DPC, which DPC was to be convened within one month’s time, such was to be done only in case there was/is no conflict of interest between the present petitioner and the petitioners in C.P. No. D-454/2011, wherein an order for maintaining status-quo has been passed at the stance of the said petitioners. On 24.4.2012 notice was ordered on the petitioners’ application complaining non-compliance of the order. On 26.4.2012 in response to the contempt application, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 submitted that the said respondent is ready and willing to consider the petitioner for promotion, however, on account of order for maintaining status-quo passed in CP. No. D-454/2011 said respondent is unable to hold DPC. Whereupon Mr. Naeem Iqbal submitted that the status-quo order pertains to the issue of promotion in other departments/cadres and not in respect of the legal department where the petitioner is serving as a Senior Legal Officer. In support of his contention, the learned counsel referred to a letter at page 57 of the file, para (c) whereof showed one Ali Arshad Khan, CM Legal has been temporarily given current charge of GM Strategic Management. Learned counsel submitted that the said post is thus lying vacant and the petitioner can be considered for that post.

Since the said letter itself showed that such vacancy i.e. GM Strategic Management does not fall within the law department of respondent authority and thus it was found that no vacancy available within the law department for promotion of the petitioner and therefore this Court came to the conclusion that since the matter of promotion of the petitioner does not pertain to his department exclusively and the promotion to be considered in the next DPC shall be for the post where officers from all departments/sections can be/are to be considered and therefore time was granted to the respondent authority for implementation of order dated 19^th March 2012, till the time status-quo order passed in C.P. No. D-454/2011 is either recalled or modified.

From the above, it is now clear that the present petition pertain to question of promotion of the petitioner for which an order has already been passed, implementation whereof has been delayed on account of status-quo order passed in another C.P., however, through this application, the petitioner has pointed out that certain officers are holding acting charge of certain posts and is seeking an order for directing the respondent No. 2 authority to put him in charge of any of the posts, which besides being beyond the scope of this petition can also not be claimed by the petitioner as a matter of right and it is wholly incorrect to say that the order dated 26.4.2012 passed by this court on account of suppression of facts that certain posts were being held by the officers of the authority on “acting charge basis”. We would, therefore, dismiss the application being misconceived and mala-fide with cost of Rs.2000/= to be deposited by the petitioner, in the High Court Bar Library’s account within a week’s time.

J U D G E

DB.Mr.Justice Maqbool Baqar & Mr.Justice M.Shafi Siddiqui/03.5.2012\zahid