Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 1771 2020 SLD 1771 2020 PLC 905
Islamabad High Court
Writ Petitions Nos. 3503, 1700 of 2019 and 3143 of 2018, decision Dated: 19-11-2019, hearing Date : 23-10-2019.
MIANGUL HASSAN AURANGZEB, JUSTICE
Kashif Ali Malik and Muhammad Asif Gujjar for Petitioner. Arshid Mehmood Kiani, Learned Deputy Attorney-General for
Respondents.

MST. SAMAN NAZ

VS

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FEDERAL EDUCATION AND PROFESSION TRAINING ISLAMABAD AND 4 OTHERS

Law: Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973

Section: 20-A

Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973--- ----R.20-A---Office Memorandum No. 1(28)/75-D.II dated 06-03-1975---Appointment on deputation---Withdrawal of---Wedlock policy---Effect---Contention of employees (constitutional petitions) was that the orders for their repatriation to the parent departments were against law---Validity---Deputationist was not entitled to complete the tenure of deputation---Competent authority had power to repatriate a deputationist without assigning any reason---No vested right accrued to a deputationist to continue for the period of deputation---Competent authority was empowered to repatriate a deputationist as and when exigencies of service required---Employees had no grievance against their repatriation to parent departments by the borrowing departments---No legal or vested right was available to a deputationist to serve in the borrowing departments for an indefinite period---Provisions of R.20-A of Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973 could not be interpreted to provide for an indefinite period to an appointment on deputation---Parent department had not issued No Objection Certificate in favour of employees for an extension in their deputation period---Borrowing departments had expressed its unwillingness to extend the deputation period of employees---Absorption or confirmation of any deputationist in the borrowing department was to be according to prescribed procedure---Consent of deputationist for suspension or termination of lien on his permanent post in the parent department as well as agreement of the parent department was to be obtained---Petitioners' borrowing departments had not sought concurrence of parent department for their absorption during permissible deputation period---Department was directed not to discriminate the deputationist while deciding their cases for repatriation and absorption should be made through competitive process---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances. Pakistan v. Fazal Rehman Khundkar PLD 1959 SC 82; Dr. Shafi-ur-Rehman Afridi v. CDA, Islamabad 2010 SCMR 378; Mst. Robia Ayub v. Federation of Pakistan 2013 PLC (C.S.) 915; Abdul…
🔒
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