Case Details

Citation(s)
1966 SLG 5354 = 1966 SLD 5354 = 1966 PLD 825
West Pakistan Lahore
Writ Petition No. 30 of 1960, decided on 15th March 1966.
Presented By: Muhammad Gul and Muhammad Afzal Cheema, JJ
A. K. Brohi, Ch. K. E. Chuhan, Ch. Muhammad Sadiq and M. Saleem Chaudhri for Petitioner.   Ataullah Sajjad, Additional A: G. Sh. Muhammad Bashir and M. Ihsan-ul-Haq for
Respondents.

DR. M. S. QURAISHI-Petitioner  

VERSUS

  WEST  PAKISTAN  GOVERNMENT,  AND ANOTHER Respondents

Law: Government of India Act, 1935

Section: 266(3)

Law: Constitution of Pakistan (1956)

Section: 188(2),232,170

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1962

Section: 185(2),186(2),98

Law: Establishment of West Pakistan Act, 1955

Section: 8(3)

(a) Government of India Act, 1935-----   ---S.266(3)-Constitution of Pakistan (1956), Art. 188(2) and Constitution of Pakistan (1962) Arts. 185(2) & 186(2) - Provisions contained, in Constitution requiring consultation with Public Service Commission in matters of recruitment, appointment, etc.-Directory and not mandatory Non-compliance would not render appointment, otherwise validly made, ineffective and inoperative.   Where the question was whether section 266(3) of the Government of India Act, 1935 was mandatory in the Sense that a non-compliance with its requirement would make an appointment to civil post, otherwise made by a competent authority, void:   Held, a review of authorities on the subject and the historical background of the provision of section 266(3) of the Government of India Act, 1935 leave no manner of doubt that the provision is directory in its requirement and failure of a Government to consult Public Service Commission or an appointment made in disregard of its advice would not make the appointment illegal. The provisions in the Government of India Act, 1935 and the successor Constitutions requiring consultation with Public Service Commission have always been regarded as directory and not mandatory so that any appoint ment made in violation of such provisions would be at the most irregular and not void. While the Government of India Act, 1935 was being debated in the British Parliament, Sir Samuel Hoare, the then Secretary of State for India, supporting the recommenda tions of the Joint Select Committee on the institution of Public Service Commissions said : "Experience goes to show that they (the Commission) are likely to have more influence if they have advisory rather than mandatory powers. The danger is that if you give them mandatory powers you then set up two Governments in a Province and two Governments at the Centre, and there is everything to be said against a procedure of that kind." This makes it perfectly clear that the framers of the Government of India Act, 1935 did not intend to place the functions of the Public Service Commissions at a higher footing than advisory, and therefore, it would be…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register