Case Details

Citation(s)
2023 SLG 2144 2023 SLD 2144 2023 SCMR 1427
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petitions Nos. 657 to 662 of 2020, decided on 5th July, 2022. (Against the judgment dated 11. 12.2019 passed by the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, in Appeals. Nos. 1096(R)CS/2019, 1103(R)CS/2019, 1106(R)CS/2019, 1107(R)CS/2019, 1108(R)CS/2019
Present: Umar Ata Bandial, C.J., Amin-ud-Din Khan and Muhammad Ali Mazhar, JJ
Muhammad Aftab Alam Rana, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners. Ayaz Shaukat, DAG, Wing Commander, Muhammad Kamran Haider Ali, Superintendent for
Respondents.

ASRAR AHMED and others---Petitioners

VERSUS

CHAIRMAN PAKISTAN AERONAUTICAL COMPLEX BOARD, KAMRA and others---Respondents

Law: Pakistan Aeronautical Complex Board Ordinance, 2000

Section: 3&7(a)

(a) Pakistan Aeronautical Complex Board Ordinance (XXVIII of 2000)--- ----Ss. 3 & 7(a)---PAC Board Employees (Service) Rules, 2002, Rr. 2 & 4(g)---Employees of Mirage Rebuild Factory, Kamra appointed before promulgation of the Pakistan Aeronautical Complex Board Ordinance, 2000 ('the PACB Ordinance')---Whether civil servants or employees of the Pakistan Aeronautical Complex Board ('the PAC Board')---Option to remain a civil servant not exercised---Approbate and reprobate, doctrine of---Applicability---On one hand, the petitioners (employees) were asserting that they submitted the option ( to remain civil servants) but on the other hand, their never-ending and non-stop attempts in the departmental examination unambiguously corroborated that they never submitted any option (to remain civil servants) in keeping with the requirements laid down in the PACB Ordinance---Petitioners intermittently appeared in the departmental examinations starting from the year 2012 to 2018, but nobody could qualify the examination which was a precondition for awarding promotion---Demeanor of petitioners signified they assented and acquiesced to be governed by the PACB Ordinance and the PAC Board Employees (Service) Rules, 2002 ('the PACB Rules'), rather than being governed under the Civil Servants Act, 1973 and the Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973 ('the APT Rules')---It was clear from the conduct of the petitioners that, after failure in the departmental examinations, a fall back stand was set in motion that the promotion cases of the petitioners should be processed in accordance with the APT Rules, being civil servants, and not as the employees of the PAC Board without submitting their option at the relevant time when they were afforded an opportunity to segregate themselves from the purview of the PACB Rules, but they failed to do so despite receiving an evenhanded and fair opportunity---Plea of the petitioners was also hit by the doctrine of approbate and reprobate---It was also beyond any logical comprehension that according to the petitioners they were forced to sit in the examination, but they never put forward any objection or…
🔒
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