Case Details

Citation(s)
2019 SLG 318 2019 SLD 318 2019 PLJ 45
Islamabad High Court
W.P. No. 348 of 2018, decision Dated: 21.05.2018. Dates of hearing: 17 & 21.05.2018.
SHAUKAT AZIZ SIDDIQUI, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Mr. Hafiz S.A. Rehman, Hifz-ur-Rehman Syed and Muhammad Anwar Mughal, Advocates (in W.P. No. 348/2018). Mr. Muhammad Ali Salimi, Advocate Vice Counsel (in W.P. No. 578 of 2018).
Respondent(s) by: Mr. Abdur Rahim Bhatti, Advocate, Mr.

MUHAMMAD ZUBAIR, PRINCIPAL ENGINEER, PAK. N.R.A. AND 4 OTHERS

VS

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY AND 3 OTHERS

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 18,199

Constitution of Pakistan, 1973-- ----Arts. 18 & 199--Constitutional petition--Constitutional jurisdiction--Advertisement for recruitment on various posts--Petitioners appeared in written examination and remained successful--Interview committee recommended name of petitioners which were also approved by PPRA Board--Appointments of petitioners were withheld--Fundamental right of petitioners to enter upon any lawful profession--Challenge to--Petitioners were selected and approved by such high ranked responsible officers--Selection process was over and above-mentioned HR Committees recommended and PPRA Board approved appointments of all candidates, some of whom were also given appointment letters--They acquired final clearance and were either appointed or were at verge of being given appointment--Any deprivation at this stage to persons, who had gone through complete selection process laid down by respondents, would not only be detrimental to rule of law, but would also cause serious prejudice to opportunity of employment, that was secured by petitioners after selection and approval by high-level committees and Board--That authority cannot be undermined or arrogated at sole discretion or on whims of Managing Director--Previous Managing Director had signed their appointment letters, some of which were communicated and others were yet to be communicated when impugned decision has been taken--In such a way, petitioners have earned legal and legitimate expectancy of being appointed against their relevant posts, which right cannot be taken away or rescinded to their detriment, summarily without pointing out any abuse of process of law--Entire selection process was in order--There was no complaint from any quarter and petitioners have completely gone through selection process and are entitled for being appointed against posts they were selected for--In such a situation, it was not legally justifiable to strike down and scrap entire process of recruitment through an arbitrary, non-speaking and fanciful order, without assigning cogent and convincing reasons whatsoever for such a bureaucratic approach--Through impugned summary, respondents have tried to trample over…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492