Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: FAZAL KARIM, READER, LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE VS Respondent: PUNJAB PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
2000 P L C (C
2000 P L C (C.S.) 119
[Lahore High Court]
Before Malik Muhammad Qayyum, J
FAZAL KARIM, READER LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE and 5 others
Versus
PUNJAB PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION through Chairman
Writ Petition No. 12420 of 1999, heard on 16th September, 1999.
(a) Punjab Judicial Service Rules, 1994‑‑‑
‑‑‑‑R.7(1)(a)(ii)‑‑‑Expression "practised the profession of law" and "any"‑‑ Connotation‑‑‑ Expression "practised the profession of law" has to include any period of Government service by a member of the establishment of Supreme Court or High Court or Courts subordinate to it‑‑‑Nothing existed in the explanation or in the Rules itself to indicate that the performance of two years' service must be there after a person had qualified his law examination‑‑‑Use of word "any", is significant and lends support to the contention that any period of Government service even before the person had obtained‑ law degree will be sufficient for the purpose of explanation.
Inamur Rehman v. Federation of Pakistan and others 1992 SCMR 563 ref.
(b) Punjab Judicial Service Rules, 1994‑‑‑
‑‑‑‑R.7(1)(a)(ii)‑‑‑Constitution
of Pakistan (1973), Art.199‑‑‑Constitutional petition‑‑‑ Eligibility to apply for the post of Civil Judge‑cum‑Judicial Magistrate‑‑‑Whether two years of Government service by a member of the establishment of Supreme Court, or High Court or Courts subordinate to it, before passing the law examination, would be deemed to be a period spent in practising the profession of law‑‑‑Any member of such establishment who had rendered two years' service even before having obtained the degree of law was eligible to apply for such posts.
Muzamil Akhtar Shabir and Muqtedir Akhtar Shabir for Appellants.
Musthaq Mohal for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 16th September, 1999.
JUDGMENT
This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 has been filed by five petitioners, all of whom are working in the establishment of this Court. However, petitioner No.5 is working as stenographer in the Sessions Court, Sargodha. Pursuant to the advertisement appearing in the daily Nawa‑i‑Waqt on 2‑5‑1999, they applied for being appointed as Civil Judge‑cum‑Judicial Magistrate to the Punjab Public Service Commission. Their applications were, however, rejected on the ground that they did not possess the requisite experience. This decision of the Punjab Public Service Commission has been challenged in this Constitutional petition.
2. At the outset, it may be stated that under an interim order passed on 5‑7‑1999, all the petitioners were allowed to appear in the examination being held for the purpose of selection. The learned counsel appearing for Punjab Public Service Commission has informed that petitioners Nos. l, 3 and 5 have failed. Consequently, to their extent this petition has become infructuous.
2. The dispute between the parties revolves around the interpretation of rule 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Punjab Judicial Service Rules, 1994 which reads as under:‑‑
"(1) A candidate should possess a degree in law from a recognized University entitling him to practise the Profession of Law or is a Barrister of England or Ireland or is, a Member of the Faculty of Advocate of Scotland and
(2) He has practised the profession of law for not less than two years.
Explanation.‑‑For the purposes of clause (2), the expression Practised the Profession of Law' shall include any period of Government service by a person as--
(a) District Attorney and Deputy District Attorney.
(b) Full time prosecutor authorised to conduct prosecution on behalf of the Government.
(c) Member of the establishment of Supreme Court of Pakistan, Lahore
High Court, subordinate to the Lahore High Court."
3. It is common ground between the parties that if the member of establishment of the Supreme Court or High Court or any Court subordinate to it has service of two years he shall be deemed to have practised the profession of law as provided in the Explanation to the said rule.
4. According to the respondents, however, two years' service by a person must be after he had qualified his law examination and had obtained degree in law from recognized university. It is claimed that the service performed by a member of the establishment before his qualifying law examination would not fall under the Explanation.
5. On the other hand, Mr. Muzamil Akhtar Shabir, the learned counsel for the petitioners has asserted that according to the Explanation any period of service in the establishment of the Supreme Court, High Court or Courts subordinate to it has to be taken into consideration while determining as to whether a person is entitled to, appear in the examination.
6. There is considerable force in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners. According to the Explanation to rule 7(1)(a)(ii) o: the Punjab Judicial Service Rules, 1994, the expression "practised the profession of law" has to include any period of Government service by a member of the establishment of the Supreme Court or High Court or Courts subordinate to it. There is nothing in the Explanation or in the rules itself to indicate that the performance of two years' service must be after a person has qualified his law examination. The use of word "any" is significant and lends support to the contention that any period of Government service even before the person has obtained law degree would be sufficient for the purpose of explanation. In Inamur Rehman v. Federation of Pakistan and others (1992 SCMR 563), the word "any" has been defined at page 587 as follows:‑‑
"Word 'any' has a diversity of meaning and may be employed to indicate 'all' or 'every' as well as 'some' or 'one' and its meaning in a given statute depends upon the context and the subject‑matter of the statute."
7. The interpretation being placed by the respondents is, therefore, not borne out by the Explanation which is being misinterpreted.
8. It follows, therefore, that being a member of the establishment of the Supreme Court or High Court or Courts subordinate to it, if he has rendered two years' service even before having obtained the degree of law he is eligible to apply for the post of Civil Judge‑cum‑Judicial Magistrate.
As a result of what has been stated above, this petition is allowed to the extent of petitioners Nos.2 and 4 and the orders of the Punjab Public Service Commission rejecting the application of the said petitioners is declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
No order as to costs.
Q.M.H./M.A,K./F‑102/L Petition allowed.