Last Updated on October 31, 2021 by ShumailaKamalBHP
The Peshawar High Court Peshawar has given its decision on 06-03-214 in connection with Service Structure Issue of NADRA Employees. Some salient points of this decision are as under and the full detail is available at the copy of the decision.
In this WP No. 3210/212, the petitioners have asked the following prayers:
It is therefore most humbly requested that on acceptance of this writ petition, the august Court is requested to declare that:-
The new service structure dated 06-03-2012 as without lawful authority, unconstitutional, violation of Article 4, 25 and 27 of the Constitution, violation of decision made in meeting dated 22-2-212 discriminatory and disadvantageous to the service career of the petitioners, therefore the same may be set aside.
The respondents may be directed to restore the name, designation as Deputy Director with BPS-18 with all consequential benefits.
Any other remedy which is not specifically prayed for that may also be awarded in favour of the petitioners.
Precisely sated facts as averred in the petition are that the petitioners joined NADRA as Assistant Manager/System Engineer in SPS-0-6 which is equivalent to Basic Pay Scale BPS-17: thus the petitioners were later on promoted on different dates to the post of Deputy Manager in SPS-0-07 which is equivalent to BPS-18; that all the employees of NADRA were regularized vide Notification dated 17-10-2011 with immediate effect; that recently the post of Deputy Manager was re-designated as Deputy Director and was placed in BPS-18 which was followed by Notification issued by NADRA on 23-02-2012. Likewise the Provincial Headquarter also issued the same re-designations on 28-2-2012. However on 6-3-2012 a new service structure and BPS was issued which was totally in violation of decision taken in meeting held on 22-3-2012 which resulted into demotion of the petitioners to BPS-17 while they were already working in BPS-18 (SPS-0-7) and their previous service was taken as BPS-16 while they were inducted into service in BPS-17. Consequently their salaries adjustment was also not done according to BPS-18 but it was according to BPS-16 & BPS-17 which adversely affected the petitioner’s ‘service career’ compelling them to knock the doors of this court by filing instant petitions for the redressal of their grievances.
In view of the above discussion, we by allowing both the petitioners, set aside the impugned Notification No. NADRA/HR/Regulations/27 dated 6th March 2012 to the extent of equivalency table and direct the respondents to re-designate their pay scale as mentioned in the Notification No. F&A/NADRA/HQ/2002-2003 with all consequential benefits by treating their original appointments of 0-6 in BPS-17, as discussed earlier.
This post has been delivered by Sanya Memon.