Syed SHAUKAT ALI BOKHARI vs SECRETARY, NATIONAL ASSEMBLY SECRETARIAT, ISLAMABAD and anothers
The petitioner, an Additional Secretary (B-21) in the National Assembly Secretariat, challenged a notification that reinstated him to a lower rank (Joint Secretary, B-20) following his suspension. The Lahore High Court dismissed his writ petition, ruling that he was a civil servant under the Civil Servants Act, 1973, and that the petition was barred by Article 212 of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973. The petitioner sought leave to appeal, arguing that National Assembly Secretariat employees are not civil servants, citing precedents regarding Supreme Court employees. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal, noting that the status of National Assembly Secretariat employees as civil servants requires further examination in light of conflicting judicial precedents. Pending the final hearing, the Court ordered the maintenance of the status quo as it existed on the date of the impugned notification. The core legal question is whether an employee of the National Assembly Secretariat falls within the definition of a civil servant, thereby excluding the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 212 of the Constitution.
- Does an employee of the National Assembly Secretariat fall within the definition of a civil servant?
- Is a writ petition filed by an employee of the National Assembly Secretariat barred by Article 212 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973?
- Are the terms and conditions of service of National Assembly Secretariat employees regulated in a manner that excludes them from the definition of civil servants?
- Section 2(a), Civil Servants Act 1973
- Article 212, Constitution of Pakistan 1973
- Article 87(3), Constitution of Pakistan 1973
- Rule 12, National Assembly Secretariat (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules 1973
ORDER
' SAIDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, ACTG. C.J.--The petitioner while serving as Additional Secretary (B-21) in the National Assembly Secretariat was suspended under the orders of the Speaker, National Assembly of Pakistan, dated 10-4-1996. He was re-instated on a representation made by him on 14-5-1996 to the Speaker of National Assembly. The order of his reinstatement reads as follows:-- "Approved reinstated with effect from the date of suspension.
(Sd.)
Speaker."
' However, the Notification dated 18-9-1996 issued by the National Assembly Secretariat shows that the petitioner was re-instated and posted as Joint secretary (B-20) in the National Assembly Secretariat with effect from the date of the issuance of the notification. The petitioner challenged the validity of the notification dated 18-9-1996 in Writ Petition No,1616 of 1996. This Writ Petition was however, dismissed by a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, by order dated 15-5-1997 holding that the petitioner was a civil servant as defined in section 2(a) of the Civil Servants Act and therefore the Writ Petition is barred under Article 212 of the Constitution.
The above order was passed in the absence of the petitioner. The petitioner is now seeking leave to appeal from the order of the High Court.
2. Mian Fazle Mahmood, learned senior Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner, contended before us that the employees of the Secretariat of the National Assembly do not fall within the category of civil servant and therefore a dispute relating to the terms and conditions of service of such employee are not amenable to the jurisdiction of the Service Tribunal. Reliance in this connection is placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner to the case of Shahid Iqbal v.
Government of Pakistan 1995 SCM R 660 and Registrar, Supreme Court of Pakistan v. Qazi Wali Muhammad 1997 SCM R 141. The learned counsel in support of his contention also referred to Rule 12 of the National Assembly Secretariat (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1973 framed under clause (3) of Article 87 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and contended that as the terms and conditions of the service of the petitioner are regulated under the rules framed by the Speaker with the approval of the President, the case falls in line with the employees of the Supreme Court who have been held not to be civil servants in the case of Registrar, Supreme Court of Pakistan v. Qazi Wali Muhammad (supra).
3. We have heard the learned Deputy Attorney-General on Court notice in the above case. The learned Deputy Attorney-General, on the other hand, contends that in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Hadi Bux v. Government of Sindh PLD 1994 SC 532 a person employed in the National Assembly Secretariat shall be deemed to be a civil servant as defined in the Civil Servants Act.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Deputy Attorney-General we are of the view that the question whether the employee of National Assembly Secretariat falls within the definition of a civil servant in view of the two decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner requires further examination and we accordingly grant leave to appeal.
5. There is an application for suspension of the order of High Court dismissing the Writ Petition as well as for grant of prohibitory order directing the respondents not to give effect to the notification dated 18-9-1996 and ordering the respondents to re-instate the petitioner in B-21, the post which the petitioner was holding at the time of his suspension. As on the date the petitioner filed his Writ Petition in the High Court he was re-instated under the notification dated 18-9-1996 we are inclined to grant order directing that the status existing on 18-9-1996, be maintained until hearing of the appeal.
6. Since the matter relates to service and the petitioner who was holding the post in B-21 at the time of his suspension was re-instated only as Joint Secretary (B-20), we further direct that the appeal be fixed for regular hearing at an early date.