ATA MUHAMMAD vs GOVERNMENT OF WEST PAKISTAN AND Another
This matter arose from a petition for special leave to appeal against a High Court judgment dismissing the petitioner's writ petition regarding his reversion from an officiating post of Senior Auditor. The petitioner contended that the Government's reversion order was passed under the compulsive force and dictation of the Public Service Commission rather than independently. The Supreme Court of Pakistan rejected this argument, holding that the Public Service Commission provides advisory opinions only and cannot dictate orders to the Government. The Court reaffirmed its established precedent that reversion from an officiating appointment does not amount to a reduction in rank so as to attract constitutional protections against adverse service actions. Consequently, the impugned order was validly passed by the Government itself, making the writ petition misconceived. The petition for special leave to appeal was accordingly dismissed.
- Does reversion from an officiating appointment amount to a reduction in rank under service law?
- Whether advice tendered by the Public Service Commission has binding or compulsive force on the Government?
- Can a writ petition lie against an order of reversion from an officiating post?
1. S. A. RAHMAN, J.-Choudhury Ata Mohammad, the petitioner in this case, made a grievance of the fact in a Writ Petition before the High Court, that he had been reverted from the post of Senior Auditor, in which capacity he was officiating, by Government, unjustly. The petition failed and he seeks special leave to appeal.
2. It has been repeatedly held by this Court that reversion from an officiating appointment does not amount to reduction in rank. Mr. M. Ismail Bhatti acknowledges this to be correct, but argues that there are special features in the present case which show that Government was unwilling to pass the order of reversion, if left to itself. He contends that there was the compulsive force of the Public Service Commission behind the order. This position is untenable as the Commission clearly gives advice to Government, but cannot dictate to Government what orders it should pass. The impugned order was passed by Government itself and in consequence of the consistent view held by this Court that such reversions do not attract the protective provisions of the Consti--tution, it must be found that the Writ Petition of Ata Mohammad was misconceived.
3. The petition for special leave to appeal is dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.
Cited by 3 cases
- Syed WAJIHUL HUSSAIN ZAIDI vs PROVINCE OP PUNJAB AND OTHERS 1978 PLC [C. S. T.] 8
- MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM vs GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN 1972 PLD Supreme Court 332
- M. IBRAHIM vs GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AND KASHMIR AFFAIRS (HOME AFFAIRS DIVISION), ISLAMABAD 1972 PLD Lahore 60