Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: Ahtizaz Alam Malik VS Respondent: Federation of Pakistan, etc.
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Ijaz-ul-Ahsan, Faisal Arab, Mian Saqib Nisar (C.J) Title: Ahtizaz Alam Malik vs Federation of Pakistan, etc. Case No.:Constitution Petitions No. 34 and 71 of 2017, 10 and 11 of 2018 and Civil
Petition No. 1750 of 2018 Date of Judgment:2018-12-06 Reported As: 2022 PSC 506 Result: Petition converted into appeal and appeal allowed Judgment ORDER. M IAN SAQIB NISAR, HCJ. Const. P. Nos. 34 and 71/2017 and 10 and 11 of 2018:--- It is the case of the petitioners that in terms of Article 27(1) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (Constitution), "No citizen otherwise qualified for appointment in the service of Pakistan shall be discriminated against in respect of any such appointment on the ground only of race, religion, caste, sex, residence or place of birth". Although an exception was provided thereto in the first proviso to Article 27(1) ibid to the effect that "for a period not exceeding forty years from the commencing day, posts may be reserved for persons belonging to any class or area to secure their adequate representation in the service of Pakistan", yet there is quota for various provinces/backward areas in the Central Superior Service examinations; therefore. such quota system is violative of the said Article. Conversely, it is submitted by the learned DAG that the third proviso to Article 27(1) ibid (as inserted through Section 10 of the Constitution (Eighteenth Amendment) Act, 2010) provides that under- representation of any class or area in the service of Pakistan may be redressed in such manner as maybe determined by an Act of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)", and pursuant thereto, the necessary amendments have been made in the civil service laws/rules, .therefore, these petitioners are liable to be dismissed. 2. Be that as it may after the changes brought into the relevant law/rules pursuant to the Eighteenth Amendment, we find that all the questions noted and raised in the orders dated 13.09.2018 have become irrelevant. The law presently in force is absolutely in consonance with the
---
## Page 2
provisions of Article 27(1) of the Constitution, therefore, these petitions having no mart are accordingly dismissed. C.P. No. 1750/2018:--- 3. After hearing the parties, we find that while passing the impugned judgment the learned High Court has ignored the provisions of Article 27(1) of the Constitution and the third proviso thereto, and also the relevant law/amendments made pursuant to Article 240 of the Constitution therefore, such judgment cannot be sustained. In the light whereof, this petition is converted into an appeal and allowed and the impugned judgment is set aside.