1987 PLP 90 (SCMR)

MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑ Leave to appeal has been sought by Federation of Pakistan through this petition from judgment, dated 11‑10‑1984 of the Central Service Tribunal; whereby departmental appeal of respondent No.1, was allowed. The respondent's grievance was that he having appeared in the 1982 Section Officers' Promotional Examination was not considered for appointment against one of the 105 vacancies which according to the then Government policy were to be filled from amongst those who had qualified in the said examination. The respondent was placed on the merit list at No.105 and if the policy would have been adhered to he would have been considered and appointed accordingly. His reliance before the Tribunal was on a statement made by Rao Farman Ali Khan the then Minister Incharge of Establishment Division on the floor of the erstwhile Majlis‑e‑Shoora against a properly asked question. The reason for not filling all the vacancies in accordance with the statement of the Minister was that while 100 vacancies were filled in accordance with the said policy, inducting 5 retired army officers on contract basis filled the remaining

5. The learned Members of the Tribunal while accepting the appeal observed as follows: "We do not know the reasons for curtailing the number of Section Officers to 100 instead of 105 as announced by the Minister and quoted at para. 2 above but such reasons cannot be allowed to revegue the solemn commitment made by the Minister, Establishment at the behest of the Establishment Division, on the floor of the Majlis‑e‑Shoora. It was a commitment which was binding and it would not be administratively desirable for the Government to go back on it. We accept the appeal and order that the appellant, who came within the merit position, would be considered for appointment as Section Officer. Learned Deputy Attorney‑General has contended that the statement made at the floor of the House of Majlis‑e‑Shoora was not binding on the Government and that the Government policy could be changed in public interest to suit the needs of the service. After hearing the learned counsel we deem it necessary to grant leave to appeal to examine, inter alia, the following questions: (a) What is the effect of the statement of the Minister on the floor of the House of Majlis‑e‑Shoora whether it represented the Government decision in the relevant service structure; (b) If so, whether the Government has lawfully changed the decision and what is its effect on the claim of respondent No.1 and similarly placed 4 other persons who fell within the limit of

105. Leave to appeal accordingly is allowed. The operation of the impugned order is suspended meanwhile. The learned Deputy Attorney‑General is directed to implead the necessary parties who, as he says, would be affected if the order of the Tribunal remains in field. M.I.???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Leave granted.