2005 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

Section 8 Delegation. ‑‑‑The Authority may, by general or special orders, delegate to the Director‑General or a Committee constituted under section 10 or a member or an officer of the Authority, any of its powers, duties or functions under this Act, subject to such conditions as it may think fit to impose. Section 9 Appointment of officers and employees.‑‑‑The Authority may appoint such officers, advisors, experts, consultants and employees, as it considers necessary for the efficient performance of its functions on such‑terms and conditions as it may deem fit. Section 11. Appointment and terms of office (1) The Director- General shall be appointed by Government as such terms and conditions as may be determined by the Government. (2) The Director‑General shall be the Chief Executive of the Authority and shall‑‑‑ (a) be a whole time officer of the Authority; and (b) perform such duties as may be assigned to him and exercise such powers as may be delegated to him by the Authority. Section 16. Directions by Government.‑‑‑The Authority shall, in discharging its functions, act and be guided, by such directions as Government may give to it from time to time. Section 43 Power to make rules.‑‑‑Subject to the provisions of this Act, Government may make rules for carrying into effect the purposes of this Act. Section 44. Power to make regulations.‑‑‑Subject to the provisions of this Act and the rules framed thereunder, the Authority may make regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act." The competent authority issued Notification dated 12‑10‑1991 under section 16 of the said Act to allow the Director‑General and all the officers of GDA Gujranwala to exercise the powers and functions presently in force in FDA, Faisalabad in all respects vide Notification dated 12‑10‑1991. Gujranwala Development Authority also framed Regulations under the name and style "the Gujranwala Development Authority (Appointment and Conditions of Service Regulation, 1991. Regulation 22 is reproduced hereunder:‑‑ "22. Subject to the provision of the Act, these regulations and the schedule, the following rules/amendments shall apply mutatis mutandis to the employees of the Authority. (i) The West Pakistan Government Servants (Conduct) Rules 1966. (ii) The Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline Rules, 1975). " Mere reading the aforesaid provisions of law and regulation makes it crystal clear that the Director‑General and all the Officers of the GDA are empowered to exercise the powers and functions presently in force in Faisalabad Development Authority vide Notification dated 12‑10‑1991. Meaning thereby the regulation of FDA are applicable with regard to exercising powers by the Director‑General and officers of the' GDA on the well-known principle of legislation by adoption/reference which is a valid method under the law as the principle laid down by this Court in Pakistan International Airlines Corporation's case (PLD 1979 Lahore 415). The source of issuing Notification dated 12‑10‑1991 is section 16 which is to be read with sections 7,9 and 11 of the said Act which did not authorize the Government of the Punjab to frame Regulation with regard to the terms and conditions of the officers of the GDA. The regulation framed by the respondents in the year 1991 also does not mention a single clause of the said Act under which the said regulation is framed. The regulation in question is non‑statutory in character as per principle laid down by this Court in Ch. Abdul Rashid's case (PLD 1979 Lahore 803). The Gujranwala Development Authority has adopted Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 by way of adoption or legislation by reference mutatis mutandis to the employees of the authority in view of Regulation 22(ii) above. It is also settled principle of law that Service Regulations of Gujranwala Development Authority are not statutory in nature. Adoption of Punjab Civil Service (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules 1975 by the Gujranwala Development Authority would not make the said service regulation statutory in nature. In arriving to this conclusion I am fortified by the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court and this Court in the following judgments:‑ Zia Ghafoor Piracha's case (2003 PLC (C.S.) 1404) Zia Ghafoor Piracha's case (2004 SCMR 35) Muhammad Anwar Hussain's case (2000 PLC (C.S.) 678) Muhammad Abid Rana's case (2000 PLC (C.S,) 1068) Zia Ghafoor Piracha's case (2002 PLC (C.S.) 1571) (It is pertinent to mention here that the said case is upheld by the Honourable Supreme Court in the said judgment). It is also settled principle of law that by mere application/incorporation of Civil Servants Act or 'statutory rules the relationship of master and servant to the employer and employee does not get transformed into a statutory relationship as the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in Hamid Mukhtar Piracha's case (1984 PSC 42). It is pertinent to mention here that Honourable Supreme Court has laid down aforesaid principle while interpreting Rules of FDA, Faisalabad which is synonymous to GDA, Gujranwala. As mentioned above principle of master and servant is attracted in this case. Therefore, Constitutional petition is not maintainable. In arriving to this conclusion I am fortified by the law laid down by the superior Courts in the following judgments:‑‑ Anwar Hussain's case (PLD 1984 SC 194) Anwar Hussain's case (1992 SCMR 1112) Capt. Rafiq Ahmad Sheikh's case (PLD 1992 Kar. 190) Arshad Ahmad's case (2000 PLC (C.S.) 1355) Riaz‑ud‑Din's case (PLD 1992 SC 531) Principal Cadet College Kohat's case (PLD 1984 SC 170) Anwar Hussain's case (PLD 1984 SC 194) Syed Jamil Ahmad's case (1993 SCMR 346) In view of what has been discussed above, this Constitutional petition is not maintainable as the principle of master and servant is attracted in all respects. In view of the aforesaid discussion this Constitutional petition has no merit and the same is dismissed. M.H./A‑405/L Petition dismissed.