AYAZ vs MUSTAFA SAEED Rr — 2024 SCMR 101 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.

AYAZ VS MUSTAFA SAEED Rr. 12(1) & 12(2)---Notification No.SO-II(SGA&CD)5-64/2011 dated 27 July 2020 ('the Notification')---Posts advertised by the Provincial Forests and Wildlife Department---Eligibility criteria for candidates---Notification granting 15 years age relaxation---Legality---Rule 12(1) of the Sindh Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1974 ('the Rules') stipulates that the education, qualification, experience and age limit for the post be provided---Rule 12(2) of the Rules states that the stipulated age may be relaxed to the extent mentioned in the Table by the authorities mentioned therein, which provides that upto one year age can be relaxed by the Head of the Department in all grades, for grade 16 and above the power to relax age of one year vests in the Head of the Department, for a period of three years the Secretary of the Department can relax it, upto five years the Chief Secretary can do so and upto 10 years the Minister Incharge or the Chief Secretary (if there is no Minister) can relax age---In the instant case, age has been relaxed by fifteen years, which means that candidates who are about forty-five years may also apply---In such circumstances the following questions arise; (i) If a rule provides a maximum age for a post why should it be relaxed? (ii) If at all age is to be relaxed should it not be in respect of an individual seeking it, provided he could justify it? (iii) Does blanket age relaxation not defeat the intent of the law, and defeat Rule 12(1) of the Rules? (iv) Whether the Notification, granting 15 years age relaxation conforms with the law? (v) Whether the interest of the people of the province is served when age is relaxed, who may only then have the benefit of the selected candidate's service for less than 15 years, since the retiring age is 60 years? (vi) Whether age should be relaxed when there is high unemployment and qualified candidates are available? (vii) What is a stipendiary candidate? (viii) The advertisement issued by the Commission stipulated selection of Assistant Conservator of Forests possessing certain educational qualification, and did not mention stipendiary candidates, therefore, why are stipendiary candidates to be selected? (ix) Why, after the publication of advertisement arbitrarily changes were made, and if so why fresh publication was not made?---Case was adjourned with directions to concerned officials and departments to file their concise statements with regard to the questions raised above.

AYAZ vs MUSTAFA SAEED Rr — 2024 SCMR 101 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 SCMR