2002 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

(Subject to ownership of car) (b) Reimbursement: Books and Magazines Rs.200/‑p. m. Entertainment Allowance Rs.835/‑p.m. Fuel 155 litrs p.m. (Subject to ownership of car) (c) Other terms and Conditions: (i) You will be posted at Precision Engineering Department's office at Islamabad. (ii) Your appointment in the Corporation will be subject to:‑‑ ‑ Medical fitness. ‑ I. D. Clearance/Police verification from appropriate Authorities. ‑ release certificate from previous employer, if any. (iii) Your service will be governed under the terms and conditions of your service agreement, dated 29th May, 1994. For any matter‑not provided in the agreement, the rules and regulations of the Corporation shall apply and prevail, however, in case of conflict between the provisions of your agreement or the rules and regulations of the Corporation, the provisions of the agreement shall apply and prevail. (Sd.) (Saeed K. Kazi), Administrative Menager Precision Engg.

3. Surprisingly, same officer i.e. Sh. Saeed K. Kazi, Administrative Engineer under his signature confirmed the services of the respondent vide order, dated 31st March, 1996.

4. Later on the petitioner PIA Corporation on coming to know about above irregularity issued a show‑cause notice to respondent specifically pointing out to him that his appointment is irregular and illegal because he was appointed by his father Sh. Saeed K. Kazi, Relevant para. from the show‑cause notice is reproduced hereinbelow:‑‑ According to the available record, you did submit an unsolicited application to Director Precision Engineering for employment to the Corporation. At that time, your father was working as Administrative Manager in Precision Engineering Department. Simultaneously with the submission of your unsolicited application for employment a note was initiated by General Manager (Q/A) of the Precision Engineering Department seeking approval of establishment of four vacancies in Marketing Cell of the Precision Engineering Department. This note was approved by the then Managing Director on the same date notwithstanding the fact that the then Managing Director had no authority whatsoever to approve the establishment of any vacancy in the Corporation, as this power was vested exclusively in the Board of Directors. As such, right from the beginning your appointment was irregular as you were being considered, and appointed against a vacancy which was not approved for establishment by the competent Authority. Neither any advertisement was released by the Corporation for the position secured by you nor any application was solicited from you. It is evident that you secured the aforesaid appointment as a result of extraneous pressure in clear contravention of the judgment of the Supreme Court of' Pakistan in the case. name Abdul Jabbar Memon v. PIA. In order to accommodate you through Back door, a proposal was initiated for establishment of a vacancy of Marketing Officer in PF‑VI at Islamabad. This proposal was approved by the then Managing Director and on 13th February, 1994 in spite of the fact that he was not competent to create such a vacancy for which the competent Authority was the Board of Directors. Followed by this irregular approval, the then Director Precision Engineering recommenced that you may be employed in PG‑VI (ii) as an Officer Marketing at Islamabad on a contract for three years, in his Minute‑3, dated 19th April, 1994, it was stated that you have over 3 years' work experience in the field of International Marketing, which statement was not correct. His recommendation was approved by the then Managing Director and you were appointed on contract basis for a period of three years with effect from 29th May, 1994. In these circumstances there was a built‑in element of misrepresentation in your appointment. The appointment letter issued to you was. signed by none else but your real father which is an evidence of nepotism and irregular appointment. Within two months of your appointment at Islamabad, you manoeuvred your transfer from Islamabad to Karachi for which a letter, dated 5th July, 1994 was issued by Personal Officer Precision Engineering, who was working directly under your father. On 19th June, 1995 your father initiated a note recommending that you may be absorbed in the permanent cadre of P.I.A. This recommendation was approved by the Managing Director and accordingly you were absorbed on permanent basis in the service of the Corporation No properly approved position of Officer Marketing in PG‑VI (ii) in the Precision Engineering Department was available in the Corporation against which you could be appointed. You were treated as over and above the approved strength for this cadre. Your appointment resulted in unjustified and avoidable financial burden on the Corporation, which contributed to increase in costs as a result of which profitability was diluted. At the time of appointment you had neither any experience nor training for service as an Officer Marketing in PG‑VI (ii) in the Precision Engineering Department. By manoeuvring this appointment and securing a lateral entry as an Officer Marketing in PG‑VI (ii), you blocked the career advancement of more experienced employees already working with the Corporation in PG‑V. This assault in their demoralization and frustration and led to employees' grievances. A special Selection Board was constituted for inducting you in the employment of the Corporation which is indicative of the fact that officials of the Corporation were acting under extraneous pressure and extending you unwarranted favour and support. The aforesaid facts and circumstances show that your appointment was irregular being against the applicable law, rules, and regulations. This makes you liable to be removed from the service of the Corporation.

5. Respondent Omer Saeed Qazi filed a. reply to show: cause notice denying the factum of his appointment as Officer Marketing being irregular but could not answer about favour shown to him by his father in his appointment. The competent Authority, being not satisfied from the reply of respondent to show‑cause notice, vide order dated 21st March, 1997 terminated his services. Against this order, after availing departmental remedy, respondent filed an appeal by invoking the jurisdiction of Federal Service Tribunal, which has been allowed by means of impugned judgment. As such instant petition has been filed.

6. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner (PIAC), inter alia, contended that the appointment of respondent is contrary to the principle laid down by this Court in the case of Abdul Jabbar Memon and others (1996 SCMR 1349) wherein this Court has strictly prohibited illegal appointments which are not based on merits or have been made for any extraneous reason, not recognized by taw as well as not being transparent and have been made on account of nepotism and favoritism.

7. He stated that instant case is of its unique nature because there would be a rare example where a father by showing favoritism and nepotism has appointed to his own son, even without bothering to obtain written application from him and without getting the post published in the news papers, inviting application for eligible candidates to contest for the post available with the petitioner (PIAC). Not only this, after a short span of time, the father of respondent under his own signature absorbed him permanently into service, knowing well that his initial appointment was on contract for a period of three years, therefore, status of permanent employee cannot be bestowed upon him. According. to learned counsel, even on merit, respondent was not eligible for the post against which he was appointed, therefore, Service Tribunal was duty bound to take into consideration all these aspects of the case. After hearing learned counsel for petitioner, we are inclined to grant leave to appeal, inter alia, to examine as to whether appointment of the A respondent as Officer Marketing has been made contrary to the principle laid down by this Court in the case of Abdul Jabbar Memon (ibid) or otherwise. Q.M.H./M.A.K./P‑55/SC Leave granted.