Malik MUHAMMAD IQBAL vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Establishment Division, Islamabad and 7 others
The petitioner, a Deputy Chief (Legal) in B-19, challenged the appointment of the sixth respondent as Chief (Legal Affairs) in B-20, which was facilitated by an amendment to the relevant promotion rules. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the amendment, purportedly made under rule 3(2) of the Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973, was inconsistent with section 9 of the Civil Servants Act, 1973, and rule 8-B of the Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion, and Transfer) Rules, 1973. The petitioner argued that in the event of a conflict, rule 8-B should prevail, thereby entitling him to the post on an acting charge basis. The Court granted leave to appeal to examine these contentions, specifically focusing on the hierarchy of rules and the statutory limitations on amending promotion criteria. The matter concerns the legality of administrative rule-making when it conflicts with established statutory provisions governing civil service promotions and the rights of existing employees to be considered for higher posts.
- Whether an amendment to promotion rules made under rule 3(2) of the Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973, can override the requirements of section 9 of the Civil Servants Act, 1973?
- Does rule 8-B of the Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion, and Transfer) Rules, 1973, prevail over subsequent amendments made to promotion criteria?
- Is a civil servant entitled to be appointed on an acting charge basis if they meet the criteria under rule 8-B despite a rule amendment?
- Section 9, Civil Servants Act 1973
- Rule 3(2), Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules 1973
- Rule 8-B, Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules 1973
ORDER
' FAZAL KARIM, J.---The petitioner was appointed as Deputy Chief (Legal) in (B-19) in the Corporate Law Authority on 4th May, 1989. In 1991 the sixth respondent Mr. Abdul Rehman Qureshi, who was at that time serving as Joint Registrar, was appointed as Chief (Legal Affairs) in (B-20). According to the rules, in order to be appointed as Chief (Legal Affairs), a Deputy Chief (B-19) had to have five years' service for promotion as Chief (Legal Affairs). As the petitioner or for that matter none of the other serving Deputy Chiefs (Legal) in (B-19) had at his credit five years' service, the relevant rule was amended in the purported exercise of the powers given by rule 3(2) of the Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973, thus paving the way for the appointment of the sixth respondent as Chief (Legal Affairs).
2. The contention, inter alia, is that the said amendment was inconsistent with section 9 of the Civil Servants Act, 1973 as also rule 8-B of the Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion, and Transfer)
Rules, 1973. The petitioner contended that in case of conflict between Rule 8-B and the amendment made in exercise of the powers under rule 3(2) of the said Act, rule 8(B) will prevail and that entitled the petitioner to be appointed to the post of Chief (Legal Affairs) on acting charge basis.
3. Leave to appeal is granted to consider these contentions. 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.