2010 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

MUHAMMAD FARRUKH IRFAN KHAN, J.-- Miss Iffat Tahira daughter of Manzoor Azhar petitioner through this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 prays as under:- "that the act of respondents about curtailing 10-marks of the petitioner being daughter of a teacher died during service be declared as void ab initio illegal mala fide without lawful authority, and the respondents be directed to declare her eligible for the post of SSE Arts being on the top of merit list having vast professional experience and being local resident of District Sargodha as per priority list and policy of Government of Punjab and appointment letter to. issue as SSE Arts, in favour of writ petitioner. Meanwhile the final list of selected candidates may not be announced and final list of merit be not displayed. Any other relief which deems fit by this honourable Court be awarded."

2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the petitioner was employed as Elementary School Educator teacher in Government Girls Primary School Gulbana, Sargodha on 1-10-2002. The petitioner's father was SST Teacher in Government Higher Secondary School Nehang (Boys), Sargodha and died on 9-4-2000 during his service.

3. Respondent No.2 invited applications for the post of SSE (Arts) Secondary School Educator (Arts) to which the petitioner applied. During the recruitment process respondent No.1 issued a circular approving award of 10 additional marks to the candidate being considered under Rule 17-A of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974 for appointment as educator. The petitioner requested for award of 10 additional marks in aggregate being daughter of a deceased father which request of the petitioner was rejected on the ground that the petitioner is not a dependent child of the deceased civil servant.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner being a daughter of a deceased civil servant is entitled to be benefited from Rule 17-A (ibid) by awarding 10-additional marks to the petitioner which has illegally been denied.

5. Conversely, learned Addl. Advocate-General contends that under Rule I7-A (ibid) 10 additional marks are awarded to a candidate, if his/her parent had died during service and such a candidate should be a dependent son or daughter of the deceased civil servant; that the petitioner is a married woman and she is already in government service, therefore, she does not qualify as a dependent child of a deceased civil servant. Award of 10-additional marks has rightly been denied to the petitioner.

6. Arguments heard. Record perused.

7. In order to appreciate the controversy at hand it is essential to reproduce the contents of Rule 17-A of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974 which reads as follows: "Notwithstanding anything contained in any rule to the contrary whenever a civil servant dies while in service or is declared invalidated/incapacitated for further service, any one of his unemployed children may be employed by the Appointing Authority, against a post to be filled under rules 16 and 17 for which he/she possesses the prescribed qualification and experience and such child may be given 10 additional marks in the aggregate by the Public Service Commission or by the appropriate Selection Board or Committee, provided he/she otherwise qualifies in the test, examination and/or interview for posts in BS-6 and above: Provided further that one child of a Government servant who dies while in service or is declared invalidated/ incapacitated for further service shall be provided a job against posts in BS-1 to 5 in the department in which the deceased Government servant was working, without observance of formalities prescribed under the rules/procedure. Provided such child is otherwise eligible for the post."

8. So far as the contention of the learned Additional Advocate-General that the petitioner being married daughter of a deceased civil servant as such is not a dependent child, is totally rejected as Rule 17(A) ibid does not provide for distinction between a male or a female child of the employee or to the effect that the child may be dependent or non dependent. On Court's query, as to whether the said 10 additional marks would be given to a married male child, the learned Additional Advocate General on instructions of the Assistant EDO(E) Sargodha, present in the Court, states that 10 additional marks will be given to a married male child but this would not be so in the case of a married female child on the ground that she is married and dependent on her husband. To my mind, this is entirely discriminatory and contravenes the provisions of Article 25 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. The 10 additional marks under the said rule are to be given to one child whether male or female of the deceased civil servant irrespective of the fact that the child is married or not. The only criteria prescribed in the said rule is that the child be unemployed at the time of award of 10 additional marks.

9. In case reported as Syed Shujhat Hussain Kazmi v. Mst. Nazish Kazmi 2007 CLC 1771 it has been ruled that, "purpose of enactment could not be bypassed, flouted or otherwise defeated by resorting to technicalities and the purpose/intent must be the prime consideration

Basic and fundamental rule of interpretation of statutes was that the court should ascertain the intention and the purpose of the Legislature, because it was the essence of the statute-Legislative purpose was the reason, why a particular enactment was passed by the Legislature." In case of Qaiser Javed Malik v. Pervaiz Hameed and 2 others 2009 SCMR 846 it has been ruled that, "it is settled principle of interpretation that the Courts should adopt an interpretation, which may give meanings of each word of an enactment taking into consideration the spirit of such legislation. An interpretation, whereby any portion of an enactment is rendered ineffective is not to be adopted when clear meanings can be given to various provisions of an enactment in a harmonious manner." The basic principle of interpretation of statutes is that if words are clear and unambiguous, then literal construction must be followed. The intention of the law given can be seen from the words themselves and no foreign element is to be introduced. The interpretation must be harmonious and reasonable. Giving consideration to the aforesaid rules and interpretation of statute it is clear that purpose of Legislature to formulate the said rule is to provide help/assistant to one child of the deceased civil servant irrespective of being a boy or girl, married or un married with the ultimate object to provide stability to the family of the deceased civil servant. Thus it cannot be curtailed in scope as has been interpreted by the respondents thus far.

10. Admittedly, the petitioner is already an employed civil servant. While the rule requires that 10 additional marks are to be given to any one of the unemployed child (son or daughter) of the deceased employee by the appointing authority unfortunately, the said benefit cannot be given to the petitioner. This being so, this writ petition is without merit and is dismissed. S.A.K./I-43/L Petition dismissed.