| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 2489 2026 SLD 2489 = 2026 PLC 70 |
Islamabad High Court
Writ Petition No.421 of 2025, decided on 22nd September, 2025.
Presented By: Muhammad Azam Khan, J
G. Shabbir Akbar for Petitioner. Raja Zamir Uddin Ahmed, A.A.G. for
Respondent. Arshad Riaz, Superintendent Pakistan Post. M. Tariq Afzal, Admn. Officer, Pakistan Postal Office.
Writ Petition No.421 of 2025, decided on 22nd September, 2025.
Presented By: Muhammad Azam Khan, J
G. Shabbir Akbar for Petitioner. Raja Zamir Uddin Ahmed, A.A.G. for
Respondent. Arshad Riaz, Superintendent Pakistan Post. M. Tariq Afzal, Admn. Officer, Pakistan Postal Office.
Mst. RUKHSANA KOUSAR
VERSUS
GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Chairman Upgradation Committee and others
Law: Constitution of Pakistan
Section: 4, 24, 199
(a) Constitution of Pakistan Art.199----Civil service----Upgradation of posts for civil servants, matter of----Exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction by the High Court----Principles----The question of upgradation of posts for civil servants is one that can be examined by the High Court in the exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction, however, while exercising such jurisdiction, certain principles of law must necessarily be kept in view:-(i.) The foremost consideration is whether upgradation constitutes a vested right of a civil servant, enforceable through judicial intervention, or whether it remains a concession extended by the Government depending upon exigencies of service and availability of resources; (ii.) The second question is whether upgradation can be granted in favor of an individual on a person-specific basis, or whether the policy of upgradation must apply uniformly to a class or cadre of employees to avoid arbitrariness and favoritism ; (iii.) The third aspect relates to the domain of policymaking itself. (b) Constitution of Pakistan Art. 199----Civil service----Upgradation of posts for civil servants---Scope----Credentials of the civil servant----Effect---- Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court, invoking of---- Argument of the petitioner was that her advanced qualifications and long service warranted upgradation---Validity---Upgradation of posts, being a matter intrinsically linked to administrative structure, financial implications and service requirements, ordinarily falls within the exclusive competence of the Government---Therefore, the role of the Court is not to substitute its wisdom for that of the executive, but only to examine whether such policy decisions are tainted with mala fides, arbitrariness, or discriminatory treatment in violation of constitutional guarantees----While the petitioner s credentials (advanced qualifications and long service) were commendable, they did not in themselves justify a judicial directive for post-reclassification---The authority to restructure posts lies squarely with the executive branch, and Courts are reluctant to intrude upon such policy matters absent a showing of clear illegality,…