| Case ID |
006883b7-daa5-4126-a01a-6fea5f4fe185 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Appeals Nos. 49 to 54 of 2022 |
| Decision Date |
Dec 23, 2022 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Peshawar High Court dismissed the Civil Appeals Nos. 49 to 54 of 2022 challenging the constitutionality of a notification issued under Rule 20 of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974. The court held that the notification violated Article 27(1) of the Constitution, which safeguards against discrimination in public service appointments. The decision emphasized that the first proviso of Article 27(1), allowing for the reservation of posts for under-represented classes or areas, had expired after forty years from the commencement of the Constitution. The court clarified that neither the provincial government nor the federation had legislated regarding under-representation, thus rendering the notification and the related rule ultra vires the law and the Constitution. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around the constitutionality of a notification from the Punjab government that reserved a percentage of job vacancies for certain areas in Punjab. The petitioners, including Muhammad Tayyab Bukhari and others, contested this notification, claiming it violated the principles laid out in Article 27(1) of the Constitution of Pakistan, which prohibits discrimination in public service appointments. The court analyzed the relevant laws, including the Punjab Civil Servants Act and the Constitution, concluding that the reservation was not legally justified given that the period for such reservations had lapsed. The decision highlights the importance of adhering to constitutional provisions regarding equal opportunity in civil service appointments, making it a significant reference for future cases involving public service regulations. |
| Court |
Peshawar High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
UMAR ATA BANDIAL, CHIEF JUSTICE,
QAZI FAEZ ISA, JUSTICE,
SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH, JUSTICE
|
| Lawyers |
M. Tayyab Bukhari (Appellant) in person,
Mudassar Khalid Abbasi, Advocate Supreme Court,
Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record,
Shaukat Rauf Siddiqui, Additional Advocate-General, Punjab,
Suleman Aakash, Law Officer, Special Education Department, Punjab,
Faheem Ahmed Khan, Additional Secretary, Services and General Administration Department, Punjab,
Hafiz Arshad Ahmed, Law Officer, Services and General Administration, Department, Punjab,
Mubeen-ud-Din Qazi, Advocate Supreme Court,
Mushtaq Ahmed Mohal, Advocate Supreme Court,
Iftikhar Ahmed Mian, Advocate Supreme Court,
Rai Azhar Iqbal, Advocate Supreme Court,
Salman Mansoor, Advocate Supreme Court
|
| Petitioners |
OTHERS,
MUHAMMAD TAYYAB BUKHARI
|
| Respondents |
OTHERS,
DR. ANEES-UR-REHMAN
|
| Citations |
2022 SLD 3278 = 2022 SCMR 1913
|
| Other Citations |
Muhammad Saleem v. Federal Public Service Commission 2020 SCMR 221,
Punjab Public Service Commission v. Hasnain Abbas 2021 SCMR 1017,
Aitzaz Alam Malik v. Federation of Pakistan Order dated 6th December, 2018
|
| Laws Involved |
Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974,
Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974,
Constitution of Pakistan
|
| Sections |
Rule 20,
Section 23,
Article 27(1)
|