| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 4798 2025 SLD 4798 = 2025 PLC 783 |
Islamabad High Court
Execution Petition No.03 of 2019, Execution No.01 of 2021, in C.A. No.1119 of 2015 in C.A. No.325 of 2014 in W.P. No.2260 of 2013 and Writ Petitions Nos.3685, 4429 of 2018 decided on 29th November, 2024.
Before Babar Sattar, J
Muhammad Iftikhar ud Din for Petitioner (in Execution Petitions Nos.03 of 2019 and 01 of 2021). Abdul Rahman Khan for Petitioner (in Writ Petition No.3685 of 2018). Ch. Hasan Murtaza Mann for Petitioners (in Writ Petition No.4429 of 2018). Barrister Muhammad Hassan Alam for
Respondents (in Execution Petition No.03 of 2019). Muhammad Umer Riaz and Umer Ijaz Gillani for
Respondents Nos.7 and 12 (in Execution Petition No.03 of 2019). Barrister Umer Aslam Khan and Barrister Tassadaq Hanif for
Respondents (in Writ Petitions Nos.3685 and 4429 of 2018). Sardar M. Haroon Sami for NHA (in Execution Petition No.01 of 2021). Abdul Rahman Khan for
Respondents Nos.5 and 8 (in Execution Petition No.03 of 2019). Barrister Afzal Khan Shinwari for
Respondents Nos.14 and 18 (in Execution Petition No.03/2019). Sajjad Hameed Yousafzai for
Respondents Nos. 7, 8 and 12. Asad Baloch, Assistant Director (Legal), NHA.
Execution Petition No.03 of 2019, Execution No.01 of 2021, in C.A. No.1119 of 2015 in C.A. No.325 of 2014 in W.P. No.2260 of 2013 and Writ Petitions Nos.3685, 4429 of 2018 decided on 29th November, 2024.
Before Babar Sattar, J
Muhammad Iftikhar ud Din for Petitioner (in Execution Petitions Nos.03 of 2019 and 01 of 2021). Abdul Rahman Khan for Petitioner (in Writ Petition No.3685 of 2018). Ch. Hasan Murtaza Mann for Petitioners (in Writ Petition No.4429 of 2018). Barrister Muhammad Hassan Alam for
Respondents (in Execution Petition No.03 of 2019). Muhammad Umer Riaz and Umer Ijaz Gillani for
Respondents Nos.7 and 12 (in Execution Petition No.03 of 2019). Barrister Umer Aslam Khan and Barrister Tassadaq Hanif for
Respondents (in Writ Petitions Nos.3685 and 4429 of 2018). Sardar M. Haroon Sami for NHA (in Execution Petition No.01 of 2021). Abdul Rahman Khan for
Respondents Nos.5 and 8 (in Execution Petition No.03 of 2019). Barrister Afzal Khan Shinwari for
Respondents Nos.14 and 18 (in Execution Petition No.03/2019). Sajjad Hameed Yousafzai for
Respondents Nos. 7, 8 and 12. Asad Baloch, Assistant Director (Legal), NHA.
NAWAB ALI and others
VERSUS
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, through Chairman and others
Law: National Highway Authority Act, 1991
Section: XI,13,14
Law: National Highway Authority (Service) Rules, 1995
Section: 3
Law: National Highway Authority (Appointment and Promotion) Rules, 1995
Section: 12(1)
National Highway Authority Act (XI of 1991)-------Ss. 13 & 14---National Highway Authority (Service) Rules, 1995, R.3--National Highway Authority (Appointment and Promotion) Rules, 1995, R.12(1)--Civil service---Contract employees of National Highway Authority (NHA)--Regularization---Litigation between regular employees and contract employees---Creation of independent cadre for contract employees---Legality---Authority of Cabinet Sub-Committee to issue directive for regularization of contract employees--Scope---Policy making authority of NHA---Scope---Long service of contract employees as an equitable consideration---Contention of the regular employees was that the contract employees could not be regularized as they had been appointed in breach of requirement of the NHA Act and Rules made thereunder---Validity--Absence of a written test in the initial appointment of some contractual employees of the (NHA) was not a fatal flaw precluding their regularization after serving for over a decade, especially when their educational qualifications and experience were not in question---Executive Board of NHA, guided by the National Highway Council, was the competent authority to formulate policies regarding the regularization of its contractual employees, as per the NHA Act---Decisions of the Cabinet Sub-Committee directing the regularization of employees in statutory bodies like NHA were without legal authority---It was for the Executive Board guided by the National Highway Council to make policy decision with regard to the regularization of contract employees and in doing so NHA could seek guidance from policies of the Federal Government in view of Ss.13 & 14 of the NHA Act, whereby the legislature had vested the authority to make appointments and prescribe the terms and conditions of service in the Executive Board subject to approval of the National Highway Council---It was for NHA to make such policy decision with regard to its human resource and not the Federal Government---Rule 3 of the NHA (Service) Rules, 1995, to the extent it granted the Federal Government the power to issue instruction to NHA with regard to creation of permanent or temporary posts or…