Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: ABDUL JABBAR IQBAL VS Respondent: GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB, LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, LAHORE
1995 P L C (C
1995 P L C (C.S.) 246
[Lahore High Court]
Before Tassaduq Hussain Jilani, J
ABDUL JABBAR IQBAL
versus
GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB, LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, LAHORE through Secretary and 4 others
Writ Petition No. 1087/BWP of 1994, decided on 21st September, 1994.
(a) Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974‑‑‑
‑‑‑‑R. 15(1)‑‑‑Punjab Civil Servants Act (VIII of 1974), S.9‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art 199‑‑‑Constitutional jurisdiction‑‑‑Competency to invoke‑‑‑Respondent being on deputation to specified post, period of his deputation was extended by Authority‑‑‑Petitioner's entitlement to challenge extension granted to respondent on expiry of his earlier deputation period‑‑ Petitioner was not aggrieved party to invoke extraordinary Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court, for he had not been denied any right to which he was entitled under law‑‑‑Every civil servant was liable to serve anywhere within or outside Province in any post under Government of Punjab, or Federal Government or any Provincial Government or Local Authority or any Corporation or body set up or established by any such Government‑‑ Constitutional petition was not competent in circumstances.
(b) Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974‑‑‑
‑‑‑‑‑R. 15(1)‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art 199‑‑‑Locus standi to file Constitutional petition‑‑‑Respondent's appointment to specified post on deputation‑‑‑Extension of deputation period‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Competent Authority in the exigencies of service, could transfer in its discretion, any civil servant to any post‑‑‑Extension in respondent's deputation period could in no way forestall petitioner=s chances of being appointed against said post on any future eventuality‑‑‑Petitioner, thus, had no locus standi to file Constitutional petition against extension in period of deputation of respondent.
(c) Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974‑‑‑
‑‑‑‑‑R. 15(1)‑‑‑Civil servant‑‑‑Extension in period of deputation ‑‑‑Validity‑‑ Period of deputation though could not be more than three years at a time, yet there was no bar to extension of said period‑‑‑Extension of period of deputation of civil servant was thus, valid.
(d) Punjab Local Government Ordinance (VI of 1979)‑‑‑
‑‑‑‑S. 42‑A‑‑‑Punjab Local Council Service (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1983‑‑‑Employees of Local Council Service would fall within definition of autonomous or semi‑autonomous organisation and would qualify for posting on deputation‑‑‑Respondent being `employee of Local Council thus, qualified for posting on deputation to specified post‑‑‑Petitioner could not be deemed to be an aggrieved person on account of respondent having been appointed to specified post on deputation.
(e) Punjab Local Government Ordinance (VI of 1979)‑‑‑
‑‑‑‑Ss. 42‑A & 42‑B‑‑‑Appointment of respondent to specified post on deputation‑‑‑Extension of period of deputation‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Order of appointment of respondent to specified post on deputation did not suffer from any jurisdictional defect‑‑‑Authority passing such order being ex officio Chairman of Punjab Local Government, Board was competent Authority under provisions of Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 1979 to make such appointment.
(f) Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974‑‑‑
‑‑‑‑‑R. 15(1)‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts 199 & 212‑‑‑Extension of period of deputation of respondent on specified post‑‑‑Petitioner claiming to be entitled to that specified post‑‑‑Jurisdiction‑‑‑Subject‑matter of Constitutional petition admittedly had nexus with terms and conditions of service of civil servant‑‑‑If petitioner was aggrieved of denial of any term or condition to which he was entitled under law, then proper remedy for him was to go to Service Tribunal‑‑‑Constitutional petition in terms of Art. 199 of the Constitution was not competent in circumstances.
Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry for Petitioner.
Shaheen Masood Rizvi, Asstt. A.G. for Respondents.
Mumtaz Hussain Bazami for Respondent No. 5.
ORDER
Through this Constitutional petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 15‑5‑1994 passed by respondent No.1 whereby the deputation period of respondent No.5 as Assistant Director, Local Government was extended for one year.
2. Facts as narrated in the petition are that the petitioner joined Integrated Rural Development Programme (now Local Government and Rural Development Department) as Project, Manager (BPS‑17) through Punjab Public Service Commission on 14‑7‑1975. Although the posts of Project Manager and Assistant Director are equivalent, and in BPS‑17, yet the chances of promotion according to the petitioner are more in the later post. He has held the later post for sometime and being No.9 in the combined seniority list of the Department is desirous to be posted on this post. It is stated that petitioner approached respondents Nos.1 to 3 time and again but he was informed that no post was lying vacant in Punjab to enable the petitioner's posting as Assistant Director, Local Government. Respondent No.5 who is an officer of the Local Council Service was appointed as Assistant Director, Local Government on deputation for a period of three years which expired on 16‑5‑1994. His period of deputation has been extended for one year vide the impugned order dated 15‑5‑1994. The grievance being made in this petition is that the initial appointment on deputation and the impugned extension are illegal and the same have deprived the petitioner from being posted as Assistant Director, Local Government. The order has mainly been assailed on the following grounds:‑
(i) that the petitioner being one of the senior most officers is entitled to be posted as Assistant Director Local Government and respondent No.5 is not eligible for the said post;
(ii) that in case petitioner is not appointed as Assistant Director, Local Government, his chances of further promotion are likely to be adversely affected;
(iii) that in terms of Punjab Local Government and Rural Development Services Rules, 1981 90% of the posts (Assistant Director or Project Manager) are to be filled by initial recruitment and 10% by promotion. There is no provision for appointment on deputation;
(iv) that according to deputation policy issued by the Finance Department, employees of the Local Council Service cannot be posted in the Government Department on deputation. Respondent No.5's initial appointment as a deputationist was illegal and the extension in the deputation period is also not tenable in law. Reliance was placed on a judgment of this Court given in Writ Petition No.815/93.
3. The learned Assistant Advocate‑General has defended the impugned order and has submitted that :‑
(i) the petitioner being a civil servant is liable to serve anywhere and if he has any grievance pertaining to the terms and conditions of service, he has a remedy before the Service Tribunal and jurisdiction of this Court is barred;
(ii) there is no illegality in the impugned order as members of the Local Council Service can be posted on deputation and their period of deputation can also be extended. .
Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Advocate‑General, I am afraid the petition is misconceived and warrants dismissal on more that one score:‑
(i) The petitioner is not an aggrieved person to invoke the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court as he has not been denied any right to which he was entitled under the law: In terms of section, 9 of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974 every civil servant is "liable to serve anywhere within or outside the Province in any post under the Government of the Punjab or the Federal Government or any Provincial Government or a local authority or a corporation or a body set up or established by any such Government".
(ii) The post of Assistant Director, Local Government against which respondent No. 5 was posted on deputation and subsequent extension of his period of deputation do not form basis for any justifiable concern. The learned Assistant Advocate‑General has pointed out that almost in every District of Punjab there are two posts of Assistant Directors, Local Government and that whenever the exigencies of service so require, the competent Authority may, in its discretion, transfer the petitioner to the said post. Thus, it cannot be said that the posting of respondent No. 5 or the extension in the period of deputation has in any way forestalled petitioner's chances of being appointed against the said vacancy on any future eventuality.
(iii) It is incorrect to say that a period of deputation cannot be further extended. Rule 15(1) of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974 reads as under:‑‑
"A person in the service of an Autonomous or Semi‑Autonomous Organisation who possesses minimum educational qualifications, experience or, comparable length of service prescribed for the post shall be eligible for appointment to the said post on deputation, for a period not exceeding 3 years at a time, on such terms and conditions as may be sanctioned by the Government in consultation with the lending Organization."
A bare reading of the aforementioned Rule would show that the period of deputation cannot be more than three years "at a time". There is no bar that the period of deputation of a person so deputed cannot be further extended by any term for a period not exceeding three years.
(iv) To say that a person in the Local Council Service is not a person in the Service of Autonomous or Semi‑Autonomous Organisation to qualify for posting on deputation is not a correct interpretation of Rule 15(1) of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974. Respondent No. 5 is a member of the Local Council Service constituted under section 42 of the Local Government Act. Repealing the West Pakistan Local Councils and Municipal Committees Service Rules, 1963, the Government of the Punjab has framed the Punjab Local Council Service (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1983. Rule 3 pertains to the Constitution and composition of the Local Council Service. Rule 5 is relatable to Initial Recruitment in the service and Rule 14 is with regard to the Remuneration of the Members of the Service which is to the effect that the "Remuneration and allowances as may be determined by the Board with the approval of the Government". According to item 22, Schedule I of the Punjab Business Rules, 1974, the Punjab Local Government Board is an Autonomous Body. According to proviso to subsection (9) of section, 42‑A of Punjab Local Government Ordinance, "the employees of the Provincial, Divisional and District Local Government Board constituted under the West Pakistan Local Councils and Municipal Committees Service Rules, 1963 shall be deemed to be the employees of the Board". This proviso read with section 42(1) of the Punjab Local Government Ordinance would indicate that the Members of the Local Council Service squarely fall in the definition of employees of "an Autonomous or Semi‑Autonomous Organisation". I am afraid this aspect of the matter was not brought to the notice of the learned Judge during arguments in Writ Petition No.815/93 (Muhammad Suleman v. The Province of Punjab)
(v) That the impugned order does not suffer from any jurisdictional defect as the Secretary, Local Government who passed the order is ex officio Chairman of the Punjab Local Government Board constituted under section 42‑A of Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 1979. The functions of the Board have been spelt out in section 42‑B and subsection (4) of the same is to the effect "to make recruitment and appointments, order transfers, take disciplinary action and deal with other service matters in respect of the members of the Punjab Local Council Service, in accordance with such manner and procedure and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed".
(vi) The subject‑matter of the petition admittedly has nexus with the terms and conditions of the civil servants. If the petitioner is aggrieved of denial of any term or condition to which he was entitled under the law, the proper remedy for him is to go to the Services Tribunal.
5. For aforementioned reasons, the petition does not disclose any tenable cause of action to warrant interference in the Constitutional jurisdiction. The same is, therefore, dismissed with no orders as to costs.
AA./A‑725/L Petition dismissed.