2016 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
FAZILA SHAHEEN Versus PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary and 5 others
| Citation | 2016 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Alam and Wazir Shakeel Ahmed, JJ |
| Parties | FAZILA SHAHEEN Versus PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary and 5 others |
| Primary Law | Civil service |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2016 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil service as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2016 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court bench comprising: Muhammad Alam and Wazir Shakeel Ahmed, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2016 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (FAZILA SHAHEEN Versus PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary and 5 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Khurshid-ul-Hassan for Petitioner.
- Assistant Advocate General for Respondents Nos.1 to 4.
- Kamal Hussain for Respondents Nos.5 and 6.
- Date of hearing: 25th March, 2015.
- 2. It is not disputed that petitioner is widow of Mr. Shabbar Ali. It is also not disputed that deceased husband of petitioner was Lab. Assistant. The husband of petitioner died while in service, therefore, learned counsel for respondents did not dispute the question that petitioner was entitled to avail the benefits of Family Package. Family Package for the families of government employees, who died during their service, is also not a disputed question.
- 3. During arguments before us, learned counsel for respondents further admitted that, by now, the government has introduced new family packages for the families of the government employees who died during service. In the light of the new package, it is an admitted affair that the government has undertaken to appoint any member of the family of deceased government employees on permanent basis unlike the previous family package, wherein appointment was made only for two years.
Headnotes / Summary
Death of employee while in service
Family package
Appointment in government job of any member of family of deceased
Scope
Petitioner was widow of deceased government employee who was Lab. Assistant
Husband of petitioner died while in service
Petitioner was entitled to avail the benefits of family package
Government had undertaken to appoint any member of the family of deceased government employee on permanent basis
Prayer of petitioner that she be appointed as Lab. Assistant could not be accepted as some special educational qualification/standard was required
Petitioner should fulfill such standards or otherwise she could not be declared entitled to the suit post simply became she was widow of a deceased government employee
Government was directed to appoint the petitioner against any post that she was eligible to
Writ petition was accepted accordingly. Basharat Ali, Legal Advisor for Education Department.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD ALAM, J.
Through this writ petition, petitioner has prayed for regularization of her contractual appointment as permanent in the light of Family Package.
2. It is not disputed that petitioner is widow of Mr. Shabbar Ali. It is also not disputed that deceased husband of petitioner was Lab. Assistant. The husband of petitioner died while in service, therefore, learned counsel for respondents did not dispute the question that petitioner was entitled to avail the benefits of Family Package. Family Package for the families of government employees, who died during their service, is also not a disputed question.
3. During arguments before us, learned counsel for respondents further admitted that, by now, the government has introduced new family packages for the families of the government employees who died during service. In the light of the new package, it is an admitted affair that the government has undertaken to appoint any member of the family of deceased government employees on permanent basis unlike the previous family package, wherein appointment was made only for two years.
4. In these circumstances, we hold that petitioner is entitled to be appointed as government employee, but we disagree with the prayer of the petitioner that she should be appointed as Lab. Assistant. For the post of Lab. Assistant, some special educational qualification is required and some other merit standards are observed. In our opinion, in that case, petitioner should fulfill such standards or otherwise she cannot be declared entitled to the suit post simply because she is widow of a government employee. We, therefore, hold that petitioner is entitled to be appointed against any post, but we do not direct her appointment against the suit post. We, therefore, direct the respondents for appointment of the petitioner against any post that petitioner is eligible to. Petition accepted accordingly. This file be consigned to record. ZC/133/GB Petition allowed.