2005 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Area Study Centre has been established under the Act No.XLV of 1975 and under the Act the Centre of Excellence Employees (Service, Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1989, have been framed. The qualification for the post of Assistant Professor as appendix Schedule of the nomenclature of basic scale of pay, age limits and qualifications for various posts in the Centre has been provided and the petitioner has fulfilled the required qualification for the said post. He further contends that the petitioner has rendered services in foreign University and obtained four years experience from the University of Jaume 1, Castellon, Spain, which is accredited University and the Degree of the said University, has been recognized by the University Grants Commission. Learned counsel submits that the Board of Governors of the Study Area Centre has no authority to challenge or make any inquiry with regard to the experience certificate issued by a foreign University. He further submits that the petitioner has been met with mala fide treatment by the University Authority and a person who was member of the Board of Governors, he himself included his name as member of the Inquiry Committee, which is sufficient proof of ousting the petitioner from the competition. Learned counsel lastly submits that the action taken or order passed by the University Authorities is not immune from the judicial scrutiny provided it is based on mala fide. Reliance has been placed on Islamia University, Bahawalpur through Vice‑Chancellor v. Dr. Muhammad Khan Malik (PLD 1993 Lah. 141), Brig. Muhammad Bashir v. Abdul Karim and others (PLD 2004 Supreme Court 271) and Mst. Bundi Begum v. Munshi Khan and others (PLD 2004 Supreme Court 154).

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently opposed the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner contending that the petitioner was not fulfilling the pre requisite for appointment as Assistant Professor in the Area Study Centre and she lacks four years teaching experience in the field. He further contends that there is a question of fact involved in the matter and this Court in exercise of this Constitutional jurisdiction would not interfere in such‑like cases. In this context, reliance has been placed to the cases of Sadullah v. Deputy Settlement Commissioner, Mtiltan and others (1988 CLC 1198), Sardar Fateh Ali Khan Umrani v. Chief Election Commissioner of Pakistan, Islamabad and 3 others (PLD 1999 Quetta 106), and Haq Nawaz and another v. Superintendent Canal Officer and 4 others (1999 SCJ 791).

4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. Following is the qualification for the appointment of Assistant Professor in BS‑18:‑‑ "1st Class Master's Degree or B.Sc. or equivalent qualification in Engineering and 6 years' teaching/research experience in a recognized University or professional experience in a national organization. OR Master's Degree from a recognized foreign university or M. Phil from a national University plus 4 years experience in the relevant field in a national or international organization. OR Ph.D. with 2 years teaching/research experience in a recognized University. OR Professional experience in the relevant field in a national or international organization.

5. The Selection Board has recommended the petitioner for her appointment as Assistant Professor but the Board disagreed with the recommendation on the ground that she lacks four years experience.

6. The Federal Government in exercise of the powers under Clause 10 of the Centres of Excellence's Act, 1974, had notified the financial and administrative rules which are also applicable to the Area Study Centres, Pakistan Study Centres and National Institute, of Pakistan Studies with effect from 25ih April, 1985, and the Selection Board has been constituted and empowered for the purpose of making selection for initial appointment or promotion or transfer to the posts in the Centres. The Selection Board has recommended and found the petitioner fit for appointment and found the recommendation of the Board. The Board of Governors is competent to make appointments to various grades subject to the provisions of rule 21 of the Centers of Excellence Employees (Service, Appointment, Promotion and Transfer). Rules, 1989.

7. As discussed in the proceedings paragraphs, the petitioner has not been issued appointment letter as having less then four years' experience in the relevant field in the National or International Organization.

8. Now the question that boils down for determination by this Court would be, whether the petitioner fulfilled the required experience in the relevant field which is pre‑requisite along with the educational qualification for her appointment. The posts were advertised in accordance with the Schedule ‑of the nomenclature of basic scale of pay as provided in Appendix and adopted by the Federal Government vide notification 26‑11‑1989.

9. The petitioner claimed her more than four years' experience in the relevant field. As per her application she has total teaching experience of eight years, at undergraduate level 3 years and at postgraduate level 5 years fellowship. The University of Jaume Castellon, Spain, has issued a certificate showing her member of the faculty for the last four years since 1998. The petitioner has also annexed with the petition a certificate (Annexure‑H) issued by the Havard University showing her joining the University as a Research A Fellow from August 1997 until September, 1998. She has also worked in the Foreign Service Academy for two year as Course Director and in this respect the Foreign Service Academy has issued a certificate. The Minister for Education, Government of Pakistan has also issued a certificate in favour of the petitioner showing her teaching experience at University of Castellon, Spain as equivalent four years regular fulltime teaching experience.

10. By calculating the services rendered by the petitioner in National and International Institutions, the petitioner has been successful in establishing her four years' experience in the relevant field. The Director of the University of Jaume 1 of Castellon, Spain has issued four years' experience certificate in favour of the petitioner and there is no doubt that before joining the Spain University, the petitioner remained in Havard University, United Kingdom. But it is strange to mention here that the Board of Governors has constituted a Committee headed by Dr. Ijaz Hussain for scrutinizing her experience in the field. In this regard some letters by the Director of the University in the flame of Registrar, Quaid‑i‑Azam University Islamabad were referred. I am afraid, those letters received by the University is not the proof to contradlict the certificates of experience issued by the University in favour of the petitioner and the mala fide is appearing on the face of the record. For instance, one Dr. Ijaz Hussain is a member of the Boards of Governors who himself included in the Committee to scrutinize the experience of the petitioner. He himself was the member of the Scrutiny Committee (the First Scrutiny Committee) to determine the eligibility of the petitioner and thereafter the Selection Board interviewed the petitioner and recommended her for appointment but the Board of Governors constituted another Committee (Second Scrutiny Committee) to determine the petitioner's experience. But there is no answer to the fact that the petitioner's experience at University of Jaume 1, Castellon, Spain is equal to 4 years regular full time teaching experience in Pakistan as it is not essential for any member of that University to stay at the University throughout the 4 years. The teacher is required to be there at the time‑of start of relevant course in the University to deliver lectures. According to the rules of Quaid‑i‑Azam University, Islamabad and the Area Study Centre, the work experience is calculated according to the time period one is affiliated with the concerned Institution and not the courses taught or the work done during that period.

11. The distinguishable feature of the case is that in the Quaid‑i- Azam University a person is expected to be present during his job and then his period for experience is calculated, but it is not the rules in the foreign University, where the member of the staff was expected to be present at the time of start of the course, which is to be taught separately before going to the next course. In the other Universities, credit hours are counted but in our University the period is counted. In the Castellon University, the courses are taught in module periods.

12. The E‑mails referred by the learned counsel for the respondents would not be sufficient to controvert the experience certificate issued by the University to the writ petitioner by the Director Vicent Martinez Guzman of the University of Castellon and the diary dates put on the said mails are 1‑8‑2002 and 15‑8‑2002 when the petitioner has not even submitted the application for the post of Assistant Professor. Dr. Ijaz, member of the Scrutiny Committee, mala fidely mentioned these mails for the first time in his report. The advertisement date for inviting the applications for the post is 14‑7‑2002 while the E‑mails letter showed the dates as 1‑8‑2002 and 15‑8‑2002 and it came on the scene for the first time when Dr. Ijaz submitted his report on 22‑2‑2003.

13. It will not be out of place to mention here that the E‑mails letters on verification sought by the petitioner from the University were not found issued by the University to the respondents, as is evident from the E‑mail letters. A copy of the, same is placed on the file of this Court as Mark‑1.

14. It is settled proposition of law that the Court would interpret any provisions of Statute needs to ascertain the intention, of law makers from the words used which must receive their literal, natural and ordinary meaning and that where two constructions were possible then that construction should be adopted which, is more reasonable or which would ensure a smooth, harmonious working of the statute and the hallmark of the Constitutional jurisdiction is to keep the functionaries of the State/Statutory body within the orbit of their authority specified by the Statute and to check the excess made by them under the doctrine of judicial review.

15. The Board of Governors has no authority to scrutinize the certificate issued by the foreign University or to interpret the experience I in accordance with their own rules or regulations contrary to the Rules of the original University.

16. The other aspect of the case is that the candidate is required to have four years experience in the relevant field in the National or International Organization. Although the word "or" is normally used in disjunctive sense, yet the intention of the Legislature may be to read "or" and "and" one for the other, when it has the significance and meanings equal to the words "and" implying conjunctive and not disjunctive. The word "and" some time is to be read as "or" and sometimes it is to be read as "and" in order to carry out the intention of the Legislature. The Maxwell on interpretation of Statute says that in ordinary use "and" is conjunctive and the word "or" disjunctive but some time to carry out the intention of Legislature, it becomes necessary to read "or" in place of "and" and vice versa. But such intention of the Legislature has to be evident from the language of the Statute itself. Reference in this context can be placed to the cases of Muhammad Arshad Khan v. J&P Coats Pakistan Ltd. Karachi and 2 others (PLD 1977 Kar. 83) and Ishwar Singh Bindra and others v. State of U.P. (AIR 1968 SC 1450').

17. Keeping in view the above interpretation of the word "or" it I reveals that the experience of four years in National or International Organization is the requirement of law. There is no cavil to the fact that the petitioner had experience of one year at Havard University as a Research Fellow from August 1997 to September, 1998. She has also worked in Foreign Service Academy for two years as Course Director. In Quaid‑i‑Azam University, Islamabad as Visiting Faculty from August, 2001 to onward in Kiriaired College, Lahore as Visiting Faculty from 1991 to 1994 and thus she has total experience of 8 years, three years at undergraduate level and five years at postgraduate level. Her total experience by calculating the total experience of the petitioner in National/International Organization is more than four years. If the experience of the petitioner at University of Jaume 1, Castellon, Spain is excluded, even then she has more than four years experience in the relevant field, National/International Organization. In this view of the matter, she cannot be disqualified from appointment against the post of Assistant Professor.

18. For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is allowed as prayed for. S.A.K./F‑53/L Petition accepted.