1985 PLP 1886 (CLC)

The petitioner is an employee of the Lahore Municipal Corporation and is serving as a teacher in one of their schools. He has brought the matter of his seniority to this Court invoking its constitutional jurisdiction on the plea that the instructions issued by the Education Department, Government of Punjab on 14-1-1974 regarding fixation of seniority of teachers, who have improved their qualifications, are not being complied with by the Lahore Municipal Corporation. The Municipal Corporation, on the other hand, insist on applying rule 13 of the West Pakistan Municipal Committee (Service) Rules, 1969 as according to the respondents the petitioner's service is governed by these rules alone.

2. On 14-1-1974 the Education Department of the Government of Punjab in order to give benefit to those teachers who improved their qualification during service, decided to prepare a merit list of such teachers and it was decided that their seniority shall be counted from the date they improved their qualification. The rules of 1969 which apply to the petitioner on the other hand, provide for seniority from the date of appointment only. In order to show that the instructions of the Education Department will have precedent over 1969 Rules, the learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to paragraphs 132 and 139 of the Education Code maintained by the Education Department, Government of Punjab. Under these paragraphs a Local Council which receives grant from the Government will be deemed to have agreed to accept the instructions of the Education Department given from time to time. The instructions contained in paragraphs 132 and 139 of the Education Code are not statutory in nature and therefore, cannot have precedent over the 1969 rules which are obviously statutory. If a Local Council violates the instructions contained in paragraphs 132 and 139 it may result in denial of any further grant to the Local Council but it cannot have the effect of amendment of the rules.

3. It is argued on behalf of the petitioner that the Government referred to in section 146 of the Local Government Ordinance means Government of Punjab and does not make any distinction between a Local Government Department and the Education Department of the Government of Punjab. There is, however, no force in this argument as under item 6 of Schedule II of Rules of Business matters relating to Local Council Service have been allocated to Local Government and Social Welfare Department. The Government in this case, therefore, means the Government of Punjab in the Local Government Department and not in the Education Department. The instructions, given by the Local Government Department to the Mayor, Lahore Municipal Corporation on 18-10-1982 and 24-2-1983 are, therefore, quite in accordance with law and have to be viewed in the light of section 157 of the Local Government Ordinance under which directions can be given by the Government to a Local Council. The petitioner, therefore, cannot have any advantage of the instructions given by the Education Department on 14-1-1974 as they apply only to the schools run by the Education Department and not by the Local Councils. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. M.A.K. Petition dismissed.