2023 PLP (C (PLC(CS)N)

JAWAD HASSAN, J.

The Petitioner has invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (the "Constitution") with the prayer that Notification dated 22.10.2001 issued by the Government of the Punjab, Finance Department/Respondent No.4 be declared as illegal and ineffective. He has also sought directions to the Respondents to grant him Selection Grade.

2. Facts of the case are that the Petitioner was the employee of the Respondents who was retired on 18.01.2012 as Chief Sanitary Inspector. He claimed his entitlement for the grant of selection grade on the basis of Notification dated 19.07.1993 for which he earlier approached the Respondents. Due to non-response from the Respondents, he approached this Court and filed W.P.No.8919 of 2011. The said writ petition was disposed of with direction to the Respondents to decide the matter pursuant to which order dated 27.04.2012 was passed by rejecting his request on the ground that Notification dated 19.07.1993 has been discontinued by the Finance Department vide Notification challenged in this petition.

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner inter alia contended that the impugned Notification is illegal because right of selection grade was accrued to the Petitioner on 03.05.1997; that the Respondents have granted selection grade to other employees on the basis of the Notification however, discriminatory treatment is met out with him; that the impugned Notification cannot be implemented with retrospective effect preventing the Petitioner to claim selection grade; that discontinuation of selection grade by the Respondent No.4 has no legal justification as such the impugned notification is liable to be set-aside.

4. Learned Law Officer vehemently contested the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the Petitioner and contended that grant of selection grade and move over was discontinued with immediate effect by the Government of the Punjab, Finance Department on 22.10.2001 therefore, the Petitioner is not entitled to claim selection grade as he completed his 8 years of service on 02.05.2005. Report and parawise comments were filed on behalf of the Respondents vehemently denying the allegations levelled in the petition and praying for dismissal of the same.

5. I have heard learned counsels for the parties and gone through the available record.

6. The Petitioner has strenuously agitated that discriminatory treatment has been met with him by the Respondents who granted selection grade to a person mentioned in ground (c) of the petition. The record as appended with the petition shows that the person mentioned in ground (c) of the petition was granted selection grade in year 1999 much before passing of impugned notification while the Petitioner is claiming the benefit w.e.f. 03.05.2005 when the benefit of selection grade was discontinued by the Respondent No.4 as such the ground of discrimination has no nexus with the case of the Petitioner.

7. It is noted that the Respondent No.4 vide circular dated 11.05.1989 granted selection grade to a single post with 12 years of service however, said circular was amended with reduction of length of service from 12 years to 8 years on 19.07.1993. Eventually, the benefit granted in aforesaid circulars were discontinued by the Respondent No.4 vide Notification dated 22.10.2001 in the following manner: "PART-I: BASIC PAY SCALES AND ALLIED MATTERS (6) Selection Grade and Move Over Selection Grade in the scheme of Basic Pay Scales and Move Over scheme shall stand discontinued w.e.f. the date of issue of this circular letter."

8. The case of the Petitioner is that he is entitled to the grant of selection grade in BS-15 as he completed the prescribed service of 8 years in terms of circular dated 19.07.1993 on 03.05.2005 while the stance of the Respondents is that the benefit of selection grade was discontinued with immediate effect on 22.10.2001 as such the Petitioner is not entitled for the same. The record shows that the Petitioner was promoted as Chief Sanitary Inspector on 03.05.1997 and was retired on 08.01.2012. He is claiming selection grade in BS-15 w.e.f. 03.05.2005 when the benefit of selection grade was already discontinued vide the impugned Notification. Moreover, the request of the Petitioner was already declined by the Respondent No.1 being not covered under the policy. As grant of relief of selection grade and its discontinuation by the Respondents is purely a policy matter and Courts could not interfere into the policy matters of the Government, particularly when it is in the I public interest. It is not in the domain of the Courts to embark upon an inquiry as to whether a particular policy is wise and acceptable or whether better policy could be evolved. The Court can only interfere if the policy framed is absolutely capricious and non-informed by reasons, i or totally arbitrary, offending the basic requirement of the Constitution. It was for the Government to decide on how and in what manner the reservations should be made and such a policy decision normally would not be open to challenge subject to its passing the test of reasonableness. Reliance is placed on "Dr. Akhtar Hassan Khan and others v. Federation of Pakistan and others" (2012 SCMR 455) and "Pakistan Medical and Dental Council, Islamabad through Authorized Representative Versus Maleeha Syed and 4 others" (PLD 2020 Lahore 16).

9. In view of above; the instant petition being devoid of any merit is accordingly dismissed. SA/I-22/L Petition dismissed.