' ASAD MUNIR, J.---The brief facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are that on 23-11-2007, Federal Public Service Commission, , respondent No,1, through an advertisement in the press invited applications for recruitment to the posts in BS-17 in various Occupational Groups/Services collectively called Central Superior Services. The said posts were to be filled through a competitive examination to be held in March, 2008.
2. Being qualified in accordance with the eligibility criteria prescribed by respondent No,1, the appellant applied and passed the written test as well as the viva voce of the competitive examination and as per the final result announced on March 11, 2009, by respondent No,1, the appellant stood at 344th position in the all-Pakistan merit list of the 684 qualified candidates whereas in the merit list of Punjab, the appellant was placed at 222nd position among the 428 qualified candidates and was 53rd in the order of merit among the 90 qualified female candidates from Punjab.
3. Thereafter on 11th April, 2009, respondent No,1 issued a Press Note wherein the number of vacancies of all occupational groups/services on the basis of all-Pakistan open merit, respective Provincial/Regional merit as well as the 10% reserved women quota were announced for the successful candidates of the 2008 CSS Competitive Examination. According to the said Press Note, the number of posts to be filled on merit by successful candidates from Punjab were 160 comprising various Occupational Groups/Services in addition to 19 posts reserved for women candidates from Punjab on account of their reserved quota. The said 19 posts reserved for Punjab women also comprised various Occupational Groups/Services of the Central Superior Services. It may be stated that the said posts were reserved for women pursuant to and in furtherance of the policy decision of the Federal Government announced vide its Memorandum dated 22nd May, 2007, "to reserve with immediate effect, 10% quota for employment of women to all posts across the board in the Federal Government Services including CSS to be filled by direct recruitment in addition to their participation in the open merit."
4. On the basis of the selection made by respondent No,1, the Establishment Division vide its Press Note dated July 11, 2009, announced the appointment of 357 successful candidates to various Occupational Groups/Services. Having not been selected by respondent No,1 for any post after being successful in the CSS Competitive Examination, 2008, the appellant felt aggrieved and invoked section 7(3) of the Federal Public Service Commission Ordinance, 1977, by means of a representation dated 5-8-2009 to persuade respondent No,1 that she was entitled to be selected on merit against the women quota but respondent No,1 rejected her representation vide its letter dated 4-11-2009 for being devoid of merit. Thereafter on 19-11-2009, the appellant filed a review petition under section 7(3)(b) ibid which was also rejected by respondent No,1 by its letter dated 4- 12-2009.
5. According to her learned counsel, the appellant has every right to be appointed against one of the 19 women quota posts for Punjab as after filling 160 vacancies in Punjab on open merit, the petitioner, being at serial number 222 in the merit list of the Punjab candidates, holds the 13th position on merit among the female candidates.
6. The learned Standing Counsel, while accepting that 19 posts have been reserved against the women quota, has contended that 13 of these vacancies have been filled in accordance with their order of preference by female candidates who had qualified to be appointed on merit for being among the top 160 successful candidates from Punjab while the remaining 6 have been allocated to females who had not so qualified. According to the learned Standing Counsel, only 6 of the 19 posts reserved for women quota were available for the female successful candidates below the 160th position in the merit list and the said 6 posts were filled in order of merit and the appellant has no right to be appointed to any post as admittedly she holds 13th position in the said merit list.
7. I have given due consideration to the respective arguments of the counsel for the appellant as well as the learned Standing Counsel.
8. The sole issue that needs to be resolved is as to whether or not the ten per cent women quota reserved for Punjab has been given effect to by respondent No,1 through allocation of posts to the qualified female candidates. As stated earlier, the reservation of the ten per cent quota for women in all services including Central Superior Services is on account of a policy decision of the Federal Government declared by its Memorandum dated May 22, 2007. The said Memorandum also declared in unequivocal terms that the said quota is in addition to the posts that the women candidates may obtain on merit in competition with men. In furtherance of the policy, respondent No,1 's Press Note dated April 11, 2009, announced the number of posts reserved for women for each Province on the basis of their ten per cent quota. In the case of the province of Punjab, the number of posts reserved for women were 19 which were split into 11 Occupational Groups/Services. These 19 posts were declared to be in addition to the 24 posts on all-Pakistan merit and 160 posts for Punjab out of which the female candidates could also take posts on merit in contest with the male candidates.
9. According to the final result declared by respondent No,1, a number of female candidates from Punjab succeeded in securing some posts on all Pakistan merit. As regards the 160 posts earmarked for the candidates from Punjab, 120 male candidates and 40 female candidates according to their merit became entitled to the said posts in different occupational groups/services. Thus, the female candidates as per their merit among Punjab candidates secured 40 posts which was in addition to the quota of 19 posts reserved for them. The grievance of the petitioner is that instead of allocating them a total of 59 posts, the female candidates from Punjab have been offered 6 posts only which means that they have been deprived of their quota to the extent of 13 posts.
10. Mr. Babar Ali, the learned Standing Counsel, was called upon to explain as to how and why the entire reserved quota of 19 posts was not allocated to the women candidates from Punjab. While insisting that the entire women quota has been duly observed, the learned Standing Counsel stated that out of the 19 posts reserved for the female candidates, 13 posts were allocated by upgrading the female candidates who had qualified on merit for being among the top 160 successful candidates in Punjab. According to him, the upgrading in costs to accommodate which female candidates has been brought about on merit according to their order of preference.
11. The explanation offered by the learned Standing Counsel, if accepted, would only make the provision of the women quota an illusion rather than a reality. Such an explanation needs to be rejected as it implies that no additional jobs are to be provided to females against women quota if the ones, who have qualified on merit, are upgraded. The requirement of recruitment of females on account of the additional women quota cannot be confused with upgradation but must be satisfied separately as is so unambiguously stated in Federal Government's Memorandum dated May 22, 2007 and respondent No,l's Press Note dated April 11, 2009.
12. However, there seems to be a misconception on the part of respondent No,1 that the women quota of 19 posts can be observed by upgrading the females without having to appoint an additional number of 19 of them against the said quota. Such a misconceived view has resulted in denying the successful female candidates from Punjab their entire share of the quota of 19 posts reserved and assured to them. Only 6 posts have been allocated to the females against their quota of 19 posts while the remaining 13 posts are being accounted for by upgrading the females who had already qualified to be appointed on merit. Resultantly, 13 females have been appointed under the women quota even though they had qualified on merit. There is no cavil to the proposition that females with higher merit had to be upgraded according to their order of preference. However, the benefit of upgrading has gone to the male candidates most of whom did not qualify on merit to secure any post as they were below the 160th position in the order of merit for Punjab. A scrutiny of the Establishment Division's Press Note confirms that 8 men in the Information Group and 4 men in the Postal Group have been appointed when they had failed to qualify on merit. The induction of these 12 men has been made possible only because the women quota has been treated in such a manner that men rather women have become its main beneficiaries. Such men have filled the posts of the upgraded female candidates to the prejudice of the female candidates who became eligible to the said posts on account of the women quota.
This could have been avoided if the 13 posts held on merit and vacated by the upgraded females had been allocated against women quota to the female candidates in order of merit. More appropriately, the 40 posts earned by the females on merit should have been clubbed together with the 19 women quota posts reserved in the Press Note dated April 11, 2009, whereafter all these 59 posts should have been allocated among the successful female candidates in accordance with merit and after giving due regard to their order of preference.
13. In the light of the above discussion, there is no doubt that respondent No,1 has failed to observe the women quota of 19 posts as only 6 females have been appointed leaving 13 of them out in the cold. As a result, I find that the appellant is qualified to be appointed to a post in CSS as admittedly she holds 13th position on merit among the 19 females who became entitled to be appointed against the women quota.
14. I, therefore, allow this appeal filed against respondent No,1's orders dated 4-11-2009 and dated 4-12-2009 which are declared to be unlawful and are set aside for being violative of law, policy and respondent No,1's own Press Note dated April 11, 2009. Allowing the appellant's representation dated 5-8-2009, I also direct the Federal Public Service Commission, respondent No,1, to forthwith select the appellant for a post in the Central Superior Services against reserved women quota so that she is appointed to a post in an Occupational Group/Serviee she is entitled to in terms of the observations made above.