MUHAMMAD MUMTAZUL HASAN vs ATA ULLAH MEHAR And Other
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal directed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, which had allowed a writ petition challenging the recommendation of the Punjab Public Service Commission for the appointment of the petitioner to the post of Physiotherapist (Grade-18). The core legal question concerned the interpretation of the qualifications prescribed under Item No. 14 of the Schedule to the Punjab Health Department (General, Specialist and Miscellaneous Posts) Service Rules, 1981, specifically whether a diploma-holder with extensive practical experience was eligible despite lacking a Bachelor's degree in Physiotherapy. The High Court and the Intra-Court Appeal bench held that the rules required a degree and treated qualifications and experience separately, thereby disqualifying the petitioner. Upon hearing the petitioner's counsel, the Supreme Court found that the High Court may have erred in law in its interpretation, granted leave to appeal, and ordered an expedited hearing given that the post remained vacant.
- Whether a candidate holding a diploma in physiotherapy with practical experience is eligible for appointment as a Physiotherapist under Item No. 14 of the Schedule to the Punjab Health Department (General, Specialist and Miscellaneous Posts) Service Rules, 1981 without possessing a B.Sc. degree in Physiotherapy?
- Do the clauses in Item No. 14 of the Schedule to the Punjab Health Department (General, Specialist and Miscellaneous Posts) Service Rules, 1981 treat qualifications and experience separately?
- Punjab Health Department (General, Specialist and Miscellaneous Posts) Service Rules, 1981
ORDER
1. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.-- The Government of the Punjab (Respondent No. 2 herein) issued an advertisement for filling a post of Physiotherapist in Grade-18. The qualifications prescribed in the Punjab Health Department (General, Specialist and Miscellaneous Posts) Service Rules, 1981 against Item No. 14 to the Schedule of the Rules reads as follows: - "14. Physiotherapist (a) B.Sc.(Physiothera-50% by initial recruit-- (Grade-18)py) Karachi of equiva-ment; and lent qualification; and 50% by promotion on the
(b) 5 years' experience inbasis of seniority-cum-- the speciality after B. Fitness from amongst Sc. (Physiotherapy)Grade-17 Physiothera-- practical experience inpists having five years the speciality after service as such."
2. Physiotherapy.
3. The advertisement published in the newspapers with regard to this post was in the following terms:- "(a) B.Sc. (Physiotherapy) Karachi or equivalent qualification; and (b) 5 years' experience in the Speciality after B.Sc. (Physio--therapy) or 10 years' practical experience in the Speciality after diploma in Physiotherapy."
4. The petitioner and respondent No. 1 were candidates for the abovementioned post and the Public Service Commission Punjab found the petitioner to be suitable for appointment to it and made its recommendation to the said effect. Respondent No. 1 challenged the decision of the Public Service Commissioner by filing a writ petition in the Lahore High Court which has been allowed by a learned Single Judge on the ground that the petitioner did not possess a degree in Physiotherapy and the to clauses in Item No. 14 of the Schedule with the Rules, 1981 dealt with qualifications and experience separately and hence the petitioner, who was only a Diploma-holder with over 10 years' experience, but did not posses the degree of B.Sc. (Physiotherapy) was not qualified for appointment. The Intra-Court Appeal filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge also failed.
5. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
6. Mr. Muhammad Arif, in support of this petition for leave to appeal, assailed the judgment of the High Court on several grounds and after hearing him we consider that this is a fit case to examine it further with a view to seeing whether the High Court has not erred in law in allowing respondent No. l's writ petition, in the facts and circum--stances of this case.
7. Leave is, accordingly, granted.
8. The appeal will be made ready on the present record, with liberty to the parties to add further documents.
9. Security in the sum of Rs. 1,000.
10. Since the post in dispute is still lying vacant as a result of the intervention in this case by the High Court, we consider that a very early date should be fixed for hearing and disposal of the appeal.
11. The office will take expeditious steps to complete this appeal and make it ready for hearing which will be fixed in the week commencing 9th June, 1984. Order accordingly.