NAEEM ANWAR vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Commerce and Textile Ss

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

NAEEM ANWAR VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Commerce and Textile Ss.4 & 7---National Tariff Commission (Terms and Conditions of Service of Members) Rules, 2018---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.93---Prime Minister approved the proposal of the relevant Ministry for placing a summary to the Cabinet for the appointment of fifth Member of the National Tariff Commission (NTC) from among a list of three shortlisted candidates placed "in order of merit"---On the recommendation of Advisor to the Prime Minister who interviewed the candidates, the Cabinet approved the appointment of respondent (being 2nd in the merit list)---Petitioner (being 1st in the merit list) challenged the appointment in the constitutional petition---Validity---Appointments against posts created by statute had to be made strictly in accordance with the procedure prescribed in the statute or Rules made thereunder---National Tariff Commission (Terms and Conditions of Service of Members) Rules, 2018 (2018 Rules) do not envisage for an Advisor to the Prime Minister to conduct interviews of the candidates recommended by the Selection Committee for appointment against vacant posts of Member, NTC---Rule 7(8)(d) provided that after the interviews the Selection Committee should recommend a panel of candidates "in order of merit" for appointment as Members NTC neither did the NTC Act nor the 2018 Rules gave any role to the Advisor to the Prime Minister in the selection/appointment of Member, NTC---Such intervention of the Advisor in the appointment process could not be considered as a valid ground for overturning merit, therefore, the interviews of the three candidates conducted by the Advisor and the recommendations made by the Advisor on the basis of said interviews were without lawful authority and of no legal effect and were declared as such---Such would not just render the scrutiny and interview process carried out by the Selection Committee under the 2018 Rules as an exercise in futility but would amount to compromising merit, fairness and transparency which were recognized in a civilized society as the ethos of a competitive process for a public office---High Court recommended the Federal Government (i.e., the Prime Minister and Cabinet Collectively) to consider the names of candidates recommended by the Selection Committee---Appointment of the respondent was found to be the product of injudicious selection, hence, the constitutional petition was allowed.

NAEEM ANWAR vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Commerce and Textile Ss — 2022 PLC(CS) 646 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 PLC