AURANGZEB KHAN vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN
This matter concerns a petition challenging the supersession of the petitioner, Mr. Aurangzeb Khan, regarding his promotion. Following a previous direction from the Supreme Court, the Central Selection Board reconsidered the petitioner's case on December 31, 2001, and ultimately did not recommend him for promotion, resulting in his supersession. The petitioner relied on legal precedent to argue that authorities must perform their duties honestly and fairly. The Supreme Court acknowledged this principle but held that the jurisdiction of both the Service Tribunal and the Supreme Court is limited in such matters. Specifically, the Court ruled that it cannot adjudicate upon the fitness or suitability of a government employee for promotion. Consequently, the Court found no grounds for judicial interference in the administrative decision of the Central Selection Board and dismissed the petition.
- Does the Supreme Court have the jurisdiction to review the fitness or suitability of a government employee for promotion?
- Can the judiciary interfere with the decision of the Central Selection Board regarding the promotion of a civil servant?
ORDER
1. ' SH. RIAZ AHMED, C.J.---Mr. Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti, Deputy Attorney General informs that in the light of the direction of this Court matter for the promotion of Mr. Aurangzeb Khan was reconsidered and in pursuance of detailed deliberations of the Central Selection Board on 31-12- 2001, his promotion was not recommended and thus petitioner was superseded. Reliance was placed on 2001 PLC 697 Rana Mahmood Hussain Officer Grade II Habib Bank Ltd. Sahiwal v.
2. Chairman National Industrial Relations Commission camp at Lahore and 2 others to canvass that the authority deputed by law to perform certain action must do the same honestly and fairly. There is no cavil with this proposition. Suffice it to add that the matter has been reconsidered and as far as jurisdiction of the Tribunal and this Court is concerned, the same is limited and we cannot go into the question regarding fitness or otherwise of a Government employee. Hence, no case for interference is made out.