| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2022 SLG 552 2022 SLD 552 2022 SCMR 439 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No. 407-K of 2019, decided on 30-12-2021, date of hearing: 30-12-2021 (Against the judgment dated 15.03.2019 passed by the Sindh Service Tribunal at Karachi in Service Appeal No. 815/2017)
QAZI FAEZ ISA, JUSTICE, AMIN-UD-DIN KHAN, JUSTICE
Saulat Rizvi, Additional Advocate-General, Sindh, Ghulam Rasool Mangi, Advocate-on-Record, Ali Gul Sanjrani, Deputy Secretary and Abdul Latif Qazi, Deputy Registrar for Petitioners. Mukesh Kumar G. Karara, Advocate Supreme Court along with
Respondent and
Civil Petition No. 407-K of 2019, decided on 30-12-2021, date of hearing: 30-12-2021 (Against the judgment dated 15.03.2019 passed by the Sindh Service Tribunal at Karachi in Service Appeal No. 815/2017)
QAZI FAEZ ISA, JUSTICE, AMIN-UD-DIN KHAN, JUSTICE
Saulat Rizvi, Additional Advocate-General, Sindh, Ghulam Rasool Mangi, Advocate-on-Record, Ali Gul Sanjrani, Deputy Secretary and Abdul Latif Qazi, Deputy Registrar for Petitioners. Mukesh Kumar G. Karara, Advocate Supreme Court along with
Respondent and
PROVINCE OF SINDH AND OTHErs
VS
SHAHZAD HUSSAIN TALPUR
Law:
Section:
(a) Sindh Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1974---R. 4(1)---Sindh Public Service Commission (Functions) Rules, 1990, R. 3(1)(i)---Special Auditor, Cooperative Societies---Appointment, legality of---Special Auditor was required to be selected by the Provincial Public Service Commission (the Commission)---Special Auditor was a grade 17 post and the Secretary, Cooperative Societies was not authorized to either select or appoint a person in Grade 17. Perusal of the original file and documents pertaining to the appointment of the respondent as Special Auditor, Cooperative Societies showed only the relevant notification appointing the respondent; there is nothing therein regarding the number of persons who had applied for the position of Special Auditor, how many had participated in the test and interview, the results of such test and interview, and culminating in a seriatim listing of the applicants in the order of merit - the merit list. The respondent was pre-selected and appointed by the Secretary, Cooperative Societies and this was done without making him take any test and/or interview The Secretary issued the notification appointing the respondent by using the ubiquitous term competent authority, without disclosing the designation and name of the competent authority. Secretary also did not disclose that he himself was the competent authority in respect of appointments to a Grade 16 position. To enable himself to appoint the respondent, the Secretary illegally downgraded the position of Special Auditor from Grade 17 to Grade 16, and, to ensure that the nexus between him and the respondent went unnoticed the Secretary did not mention the full name of the respondent in the notification and left out the names shared between them -Mir and Talpur. Special Auditor was required to be selected by the Provincial Public Service Commission (the Commission). Special Auditor was a Grade 17 post and the Secretary was not authorized to either select or appoint a person in Grade 17. In selecting and appointing the respondent as Special Auditor the Secretary had acted illegally. Respondent was not selected by the Commission yet he was appointed as…
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