FAROOQ AHMED vs SECRETARY, BALOCHISTAN PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLY, QUETTA R — 2024 PLC(CS) 1437 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.

FAROOQ AHMED VS SECRETARY, BALOCHISTAN PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLY, QUETTA R. 1(n)---Balochistan Civil Servants Act (IX of 1974), S. 2(1)(b)---Employees of Balochistan Provincial Assembly Secretariat---Not civil servants---Officers and employees of the Balochistan Provincial Assembly Secretariat belong to the Balochistan Provincial Assembly Secretariat Service as defined under Rule 1(n) of the Balochistan Provincial Assembly Secretariat (Recruitment) Rules, 2009 and they do not enjoy the status of a civil servant within the meaning of Balochistan Civil Servants Act, 1974. Citation Name: 2024 PLC(CS) 1437 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case FAROOQ AHMED VS SECRETARY, BALOCHISTAN PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLY, QUETTA arts. 4, 9, 25 & 27---Public sector posts---appointment---Transparency---appointments against posts in the public sector are to be made strictly in accordance with applicable rules/regulations and without any discrimination and in a transparent manner---It is essential that all appointments in the public sector are based on the process that is palpably and tangibly fair and within the parameters of its applicable rules---appointment made in a nontransparent manner and in violation of the law offends the fundamental rights of the general public and the citizens under articles 4, 9, 25 and 27 of the Constitution---Due diligence must be exercised while making appointments and in doing so a fair and transparent selection process ought to be adhered to---adherence to a credible and transparent selection process with due diligence is the pre-requisite in order to ensure good governance---It is inevitable to observe highest standards of diligence, transparency and probity in selecting a person for a post---Public authority possessed with powers under the relevant laws can only use them for and to advance the public good---Choosing persons for public service is not just providing a job and the consequent livelihood to the one in need but is a sacred trust to be discharged by the ones charged with it, honestly, fairly, in a just and transparent manner and in the best interest of the public---Individuals so selected are to be paid not out of the private pockets of the ones appointing them but by the people through the public exchequer and not selecting the best as public servants was a gross breach of the public trust and was an offence against the public who had the inherent right to be served by the best. Citation Name: 2024 PLC(CS) 1437 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case FAROOQ AHMED VS SECRETARY, BALOCHISTAN PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLY, QUETTA Rr. 6 & 8(a) & Sched. A---Balochistan Provincial Assembly Secretariat, appointment in---Non-transparency in appointment---Conflict of interest---Petitioner was appointed as Deputy Secretary BS-18 (Legislative Drafting) in the Assembly Secretariat while his father was serving as its Secretary---Mode of appointment adopted by the Secretariat was through initial recruitment---Qualifications and conditions described in the advertisement appear to have been tailored to restrict the eligibility criteria to a limited number of candidates which included the petitioner---High Court had rightly observed that there was no justifiable reason for such restriction and that it violated the principle of transparency---However, the petitioner was one of the very few candidates who met the restricted eligibility criteria described in the advertisement---Selection committee was reconstituted by the Secretary i.e. the petitioner's father, while under the Balochistan Provincial Assembly Secretariat (Recruitment) Rules, 2009 ('Rules of 2009') the Speaker was the competent authority and there was nothing on record to show that the latter's approval was sought---Entire recruitment process i.e. approval for appointment through the mode of initial recruitment, setting out the qualifications and conditions regarding eligibility, reconstitution of the selection committee, failing to place the cases of Assistant Secretaries before the competent forum for assessing their eligibility and, subsequently, the petitioner's appointment were in clear breach of the Rules of 2009---It was not disputed that the method of recruitment explicitly prescribed to fill the post of Deputy Secretary BS-18 under Schedule A of the Rules of 2009 was by promotion from amongst the Assistant Secretaries (BS-17) on seniority cum fitness basis and possessing five years' service as such---No process was undertaken by the competent authority to assess whether Assistant Secretaries (BS-17) were eligible to be considered for promotion in accordance with the qualifications and conditions prescribed under the Rules of 2009---Entire process was adopted to benefit the petitioner who happened to be the son of the Secretary of the Assembly Secretariat---Latter had given approvals for undertaking the recruitment process and had only recused himself belatedly and that too to the extent of chairing the meeting of the selection committee---It thus raised profound questions in the context of conflict of interest---Present case was a classic example of abuse of public power in order to benefit a family member---Petitions were dismissed.

FAROOQ AHMED vs SECRETARY, BALOCHISTAN PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLY, QUETTA R — 2024 PLC(CS) 1437 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLC