2014 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

ALI BAQAR NAJAFI, J.

The petitioner, through this writ petition, seeks direction to the respondents to entertain application of the petitioner for appointment as Secondary School Educator (English) as per rule No.3(v) of the Punjab Civil Servants Recruitment (Relaxation of Upper Age Limit) Rules, 1976 by excluding 15 years 5 months period consumed in the services rendered by the petitioner in the Government departments and to relax the upper age limit.

2. Brief facts giving rise to the filing of this writ petition are that the petitioner is continuously working as EST (V) in Government Elementary School Pira Janla, Tehsil Talagang, District Chakwal, with qualification of M.A (English) MED. Respondent No.3 invited applications for the recruitment of the post of Secondary School Educator (English) with the age limit of 20 to 35 years. He applied for the post but his application was rejected being over age. Even the petitioner sent application through proper channel but the same was also not entertained and refused through letter dated 9-7-2012, hence this writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is still in service, therefore, under the rules framed under section 23 of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1971 and Rule 3(v) of the Punjab Civil Servants Recruitment (Relaxation of Upper Age Limit) Rule, 1976, the petitioner was to be considered for the purpose of upper age limit and an inaction on the part of the respondent is an illegality. Places reliance on various judgment including the judgment passed on 2-6-2011 in Writ Petition No.257 of 2011 titled "Shahid Akhter v. Secretary School, Education and others" and the judgment passed in Writ Petition No.157 of 2012 titled "Shahzada v. Secretary Education and others" to fortify his arguments and prays for the grant of relief.

4. Conversely, the learned Assistant Advocate-General has vehemently opposed the prayer made by the petitioner by submitting that to approach against the judgments cited are pending in the Hon'ble Supreme Court the recruitment process was initiated on the basis of Recruitment Policy, 2010, where under no such provisions for relaxation of upper age limit for government servant is provided; the petitioner did not challenge the policy is not entitled to the relief being government employee; the claim of the petitioner involves terms and condition of service; therefore, this Court has no jurisdiction in the matter.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. Rule 3 sub-rule (v) of the Punjab Civil Servants Recruitment (Relaxation of Upper Age Limit) Rules, 1976, reads as under:

"In the case of a candidate already working as a Government servant, the period of his continuous service as such shall for the purpose of upper age limit prescribed under any service rules of the post for which is a candidate, be excluded from his age." This right of government servant is always available to him and he can always press into service for his further employment on contract or permanent posts. The law and the rules framed under the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974 have certainly a higher value than the policy letters. The argument of the learned A.A.-G. that the reference case is still sub judice before the apex Court of this Country is not of much help to him as, firstly, the impugned order was not suspended and secondly, in the event of final verdict of Apex Court the entire law will have to be changed without any reservation as contemplated under Article 179 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.

7. For what has been discussed above, this writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to entertain the application of the petitioner without raising objection as to upper age limit as he is fully entitled to the benefit of the rule 3(V) of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974. MWA/S-109/L Petition allowe