MUSHTAQUE AHMED MEMON vs ARSHAD HUSSAIN BHUTTO S — 2023 SCMR 174 SUPREME-COURT

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

MUSHTAQUE AHMED MEMON VS ARSHAD HUSSAIN BHUTTO S. 3---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 25(1), 27(1) & 240(2)---Seniority---Discrimination in service of Pakistan---Scope and applicability of the Sindh Civil Servants (Regularization of Ad hoc Appointments) Act, 1994 [as amended by the Sindh Civil Servants (Regularization of Ad hoc Appointments) (Amendment) Act, 2014]---Sindh Civil Servants (Regularization of Ad hoc Appointments) (Amendment) Act, 2014 (the 2014 Act) sought to give an advantage to the appellants with retrospective effect at the expense of the vested rights of the respondents---Unlike the appellants the respondents entered into the service of Pakistan in terms of Article 240(2) of the Constitution by being selected by Provincial Public Service Commission ('the Commission')---While the appellants came through the proverbial back door and were saved by the Sindh Civil Servants (Regularization of Ad hoc Appointments) Act, 1994 ('the 1994 Act')---Having secured their employment by the 1994 Act, an unjustified, illegal and unconstitutional benefit was sought to be extended to the appellants through the impugned notifications and the 2014 Act---Incidentally, the reasons to enact the 2014 Act were neither given therein nor provided by the appellants---Article 25(1) of the Constitution proscribed discrimination and Article 27(1) of the Constitution prohibited discrimination in the service of Pakistan---By way of the impugned judgment the Tribunal had rightly concluded that the amendment brought by 2014 Act used for taking away the constitutional rights of respondents after twenty years could not be recognized as constitutionally legal and valid; that the deeming clause brought twenty years after the promulgation of the 1994 Act was, on the face of it, against the object and scheme of the original 1994 Act itself, and that the purpose of the original 1994 Act was only to validate and regularize the ad hoc appointment of the employees from the date of its promulgation whereas the subsequent deeming clause went much beyond the scheme of the original Act, therefore, it had to be accepted to the extent which it was in conformity with the original 1994 Act---Appeals were dismissed with costs.

MUSHTAQUE AHMED MEMON vs ARSHAD HUSSAIN BHUTTO S — 2023 SCMR 174 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 SCMR