1995 PLP 80 (SCMR)
THE GOVERNMENT OF N: W.F.P. through Secretary, Education and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD AYUB‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1995 PLP 80 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Fazal Ilahi Khan and Wali Muhammad Khan, JJ |
| Parties | THE GOVERNMENT OF N: W.F.P. through Secretary, Education and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD AYUB‑‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 PLP 80 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 PLP 80 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Fazal Ilahi Khan and Wali Muhammad Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 PLP 80 (SCMR) (THE GOVERNMENT OF N: W.F.P. through Secretary, Education and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD AYUB‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Nasirul Mulk, Advocate‑General, N.‑W.F.P. and Haji MA. Qayum Mazhar, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 28th March, 1994.
- The learned Advocate‑General appearing for the petitioner contended that section 3 applies to all civil servants holding ad hoc appointments to a post on or before 20th September, 1986. He further argued that "post" has been defined under section 2 (1) (d). A post under Government or in connection with the affairs of Government to be filled in on the recommendations of the Public Service Commission. Commission means North‑West Frontier Province Commission. According to Rule 3 (a) alongwith the Schedule all the posts of BPS‑16 and above are to be filled by the recommendation of the Public Service Commission. In the instant case the respondent having held the post in BPS‑14, benefit of Rule 3 of the Act was therefore, not available to him. The above contention of the learned Advocate‑General requires consideration. Leave is granted.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 23‑8‑1993 of the Service Tribunal, Peshawar in Appeal No. 93 of 1993). North‑West Frontier Province Adhoc Civil Servants (Regularisation of Services) Act (II of 1987)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑Ss. 2(1)(d) & 3‑‑‑North‑West Frontier Province Public Service Commission (Function) Rules, 1974, R. 3(a)‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212 (3)‑‑‑Civil servant holding post in BPS‑14 claiming benefit of Regulation from the date of commencement of the Act II of 1987 viz. 19‑3‑1987‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted to consider whether S. 3, North‑West Frontier Province (Regularisation of Services) Act, 1987, applied to all civil servants holding ad hoc appointments to a post on or before 20th September, 1986; whether a post under Government or in connection with the affairs of Government had to be filled in on recommendation of Public Service Commission; whether, according to R. 3(a), North‑West Frontier Province Public Service Commission (Function) Rules, 1974, alongwith the Schedule, all the posts of BPS‑16 and above were to be filled on the recommendation of Public Service Commission; and while civil servant had been holding post in BPS‑14, whether benefit of S. 3 of the Act viz. North‑West Frontier Province Ad hoc Civil Servants (Regularisation of Services) Act, 1987 was not available to him.
Judgment & Decree
FAZAL ILAHI KHAN, J.‑‑‑Leave to appeal is prayed for by the Government of N: W.F.P. through Secretary, Education Department, Peshawar and another against the judgment of learned Service Tribunal, N.‑W.F.P., Peshawar, in Appeal No. 93 of 1993. Facts of the case in brief are that respondent was appointed as a Junior Trade Instructor (Mechanical) in BPS‑10 on 5‑11‑1985 'on stopgap arrangement. Pay scale was revised and he was given BPS‑11 on ad hoc basis and subsequently on 27‑10‑1986 he was allowed BPS‑14 w.e.f. 1‑9‑1986. The Government of N.‑W.F.P. was pleased to regularise the services of the respondent from 29‑10‑1987 by the Selection Committee. However, on 5‑12‑1992 respondent submitted departmental representation claiming his regularisation from 19‑3‑1987, the date from which he was holding ad hoc appointment, under section 3 of ‑the N: W.F.P. Ad hoc Civil Servants (Regularisation of Services) Act, 1987 (Act No.2 of 1987). As the representation had not been responded the respondent filed a Writ Petition which was dismissed on 22‑12‑1992 whereafter he approached the learned Tribunal claiming a right to be considered for regularisation from the date of the commencement of the Act i.e. 19‑3‑1987. The learned Tribunal vide judgment dated 23‑8‑1993, against which leave to appeal is sought for, accepted the respondent's appeal. The learned Advocate‑General appearing for the petitioner contended that section 3 applies to all civil servants holding ad hoc appointments to a post on or before 20th September, 1986. He further argued that "post" has been defined under section 2 (1) (d). A post under Government or in connection with the affairs of Government to be filled in on the recommendations of the Public Service Commission. Commission means North‑West Frontier Province Commission. According to Rule 3 (a) alongwith the Schedule all the posts of BPS‑16 and above are to be filled by the recommendation of the Public Service Commission. In the instant case the respondent having held the post in BPS‑14, benefit of Rule 3 of the Act was therefore, not available to him. The above contention of the learned Advocate‑General requires consideration. Leave is granted. A.A. /G‑485/S Leave granted.