Dr. SABIR ZAMEER SIDDIQUI vs Mian ABDUL MALIK And 4 Other
This matter concerns a petition for review regarding the determination of seniority between two direct recruits selected through the Public Service Commission. The petitioner contended that his seniority should not be adversely affected by a delay in assuming charge, which was attributable to the department, and argued that the 'older-in-age' principle should be applied to resolve the seniority dispute. The Supreme Court examined the established principles governing seniority for direct recruits. The Court held that when candidates are selected through the Public Service Commission, their merit position assigned by the Commission determines seniority, regardless of the date they assume charge. The Court further clarified that the 'older-in-age' formula is not a primary rule of seniority but is only applicable as a tie-breaker when two candidates assume charge on the same date. Finding no merit in the petitioner's submissions regarding the misapplication of these principles, the Court dismissed the review petition, affirming that the established merit-based seniority criteria must prevail over the petitioner's proposed alternatives.
- Does the date of assuming charge determine seniority for direct recruits selected through the Public Service Commission?
- When is the 'older-in-age' formula applicable for determining seniority between two direct recruits?
- Does a delay in assuming charge caused by the department entitle a recruit to seniority based on merit position regardless of the date of joining?
ORDER
SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J: --The petitioner has taken exception to para. 10 of the judgment on the ground that if his selection and that of Dr. Muhammad Abdul Haque (respondent No.3) is taken to be one, then the petitioner cannot be relegated in seniority simply because he took over the charge late because it was the department which delayed relieving him. Besides, according to him, the general principle of `older-in-age' should have been given effect to.
2. In the first place, both the contestants being direct recruits through Public Service Commission, the Commission was required to assign them merit and that merit was to hold good irrespective of the date they took over. That having not been done, there remains no other principle to guide except the one laid down in the case of Khushi Muhammad and 3 others v. The General Manager (now Vice-Chairman), Pakistan Western Railway and 27 others PLD 1970 SC 203. The older in age formula will apply only when the two had taken over on the same date.
3. There is no merit in the submissions. Review is dismissed.
Cited by 3 cases
- Aftab Ahmad Maneka, etc. vs The Federation of Pakistan, etc. K.L.R. 2014 Labour & Service Cases 82
- WAZIR KHAN Versus GOVERNMENT OF N. W.F.P. 2002 PLC(CS) 876
- WAZIR KHAN vs GOVERNMENT OF N.-W.F.P. through Secretary Irrigation, Peshawar & 4 others 2002 C.L.R. 1132