P L D 2005 Lahore 181 (PLP)

Date of hearing: 20th December, 2004. On 9‑10‑2003 an application was presented by the petitioner to the Chief Minster Punjab whereupon a handwritten order was recorded, which reads as follows: "The petitioner met the C.M and narrated her pathetic story. C.M. has accordingly desired the Zila Nazim and DCO Lahore to adjust her on contract basis on extreme compassionate grounds. " Such an order bears the stamp and signature of Mr. G.M. Sikander, Principal Secretary to Chief Minster, Punjab. It was marked to Zila Nazim and District Coordination Officer, Lahore. Ever since the petitioner has been running from pillar to post and knocking one door after the other for the implementation of the said order. Eventually she has approached this Court through the present petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 as the Zila Nazim, Lahore and the District Coordination Officer were not prepared to give effect to the same.

2. The report and comments have been filed by the respondents:

3. The issuance of the above‑referred directive is not denied, it is rather admitted in the comments filed on behalf of the Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister and the Secretary, Government of the Punjab, Education Department, Lahore that "Chief Minister has accordingly directed that Zila Nazim and District Coordination Officer Lahore to adjust her on contract basis". So far as rest of the respondents i.e. Zila Nazim, City District Government, Lahore and District Coordination Officer, Lahore are concerned their stance is that "The application was referred to the Executive District Officer (Education) Lahore for compliance of the orders of the Chief Minister, Punjab. He has submitted that the recruitment of educators has since been finalized, however, other posts of her ranks/status are lying vacant in the Education Department but she can only be appointed if the procedure provided in the recruitment policy is relaxed/waived off by the Chief Minister Punjab. Her application for appointment since not covered under the rules has been filed".

4. It is not her case now nor her insistence that she is entitled to be appointed on merit, rather she was craving for employment due to the extreme pathetic circumstances stated by her in the application that was presented by her to the Chief Minister of the Province. The pathetic story mentioned in her application need not be repeated here as on consideration of the same the Chief Minister seem to have passed the abovementioned order, which was conveyed by the Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister to Zila Nazim and District Coordination Officer, Lahore. The order itself is self‑explanatory that she was to be adjusted on "extreme compassionate grounds" in view of her pathetic story. After that she had failed in her efforts to get the directive of the Chief Minster implemented, she again made an application on which the Principal Secretary to Chief Minister Punjab recorded the order that "C M has desired the Education Minister to kindly listen to her and redress her grievance". The repeated orders passed by the Chief Minister of the Province could well be construed as of special nature having been passed in a case on extreme compassionate grounds. Its non‑compliance by the Government functionaries on the ground that "she can only be appointed if the procedure provided in the recruitment policy is relaxed/waived off by the Chief Minister Punjab" was not warranted. Even the later communication made by the Deputy Secretary (V) of the Chief Minister's Secretariat dated 26‑7‑2004, instructing the law officer that "the case may be defended on behalf of the Government" ran counter to the earlier two orders passed by the Chief Minister. Such a backtrack did not behave a good Government. Suffice it to observe that the Chief Minister being the Chief Executive of the Provincial Government having issued the .directive, which from the tenor of its contents shows due application of his mind and appreciation of the pathetic circumstances of the petitioner, it was entitled to be respected by the other functionaries of the Government and to be carried out. It may further be observed that with the issuance of such an order the legitimate expectancy and hope was created for the petitioner that her days of misery and sufferings will be over shortly but unfortunately this was not so and she had to seek redressal from the Court by tiling a petition and undergoing further agony. To her bad luck, even the petition is being now opposed by the Government functionaries. It should be a matter of concern for all, those who passed the order and those who are charged with the duty of its implementation. It is not understandable that if an order is not to be enforced or, implemented (passed by even the highest provincial functionary i.e. the Chief Minister) why should such an order be issued. The issuance of such an order whereas creates hopes and expectations it result in total frustration and disappointment when it is not implemented and yields no benefit or fruit. Of late it has been observed in several cases that the orders/directives issued by the Chief Minister Secretariat are not respected or implemented by Governmental functionaries. This perhaps happens as the issuance of such orders or directives is considered by the subordinates as a routine affair and exercise. The non‑compliance of such directives and orders mocks the authority passing such orders. It undoubtedly militates even against the declared, proclaimed and projected policy of good governance. It is thus high time that before issuing such orders and directives the matter is seriously dealt with, pondered and on due consideration only appropriate order or directive should be issued and it should then be seen that the same is carried out, honoured and implemented. Routine issuance of directives, which may be turned down by the subordinates, adversely reflects upon the authority of the Government itself. In the instant case the petitioner who somehow had succeeded in having access to the Chief Minister of the Province and her, pathetic circumstances persuaded the Chief Minister to pass an order, the same ought to have been implemented and complied with without any demur but unfortunately the petitioner has undergone further sufferance and had to knock the door of the Court for some relief. It indeed is a pathetic situation. In view of the above the petition is accepted to the extent that non‑compliance of the order of the Chief Minister of the Province is illegal and unwarranted and that the Chief Minister Secretariat should ensure the compliance of the order of the Chief Minister Without further delay. Respondents Nos.3 to 5 will bear the costs of the petition. M.H/T‑66/L Petition allowed.