' SYED HASAN AZHAR RIZVI, J.--- Petitioner is a retired Government servant and presently participated in Social Welfare of Trade Union activities has come across serious irregularities in appointments in HESCO in violation of rules and without merit in the post of Administration/Human Resources therefore, petitioner has filed the present petition with following prayer:- "(a) to hold that filling up the post of Admin/HR Director BPS-20 by way of contract employment is sheer illegality and unsustainable in law.
(b) to direct the respondents fill up the post of Admn./HR Director BPS-20 of HESCO, by way of promotion of eligible, senior most, and fit officers of BPS-19 working in Administration Cadre.
(c) To restrain the respondents from extending the contract period of private respondent which is in sheer violation of law?
(d) Ad-interim relief is also prayed.
(e) Award any other relief as deemed just and proper."
2. It is contended by Mr. S. Muhammad Saulat Rizvi. Advocate for petitioner that after free fragmentation of WAPDA, all the area electricity powers and generation stations have been divided into 14 independent companies duly registered, specifically for privatization purposes but the same are not yet privatized and have not been given autonomy and are under control of Ministry Water and Power, Government of Pakistan and PEPCO, the respondents Nos.1 and 2. He urged that in all the companies there are certain sanctioned posts which includes a post of Administration/HR Director in BPS-20 which were earlier filled up through contractual employment but subsequently, the said posts were brought on regular cadre under the directives of respondent No,2 and eligible and fit regular officers of BPS-19 were promoted on the basis of combined seniority cum fitness duly maintained by respondent No,2 PEPCO. The seniority list of Admn./HR Director of BPS-20, Director Administration BPS-19 have been enclosed with the memo. Of petition.
3. It was next contended by counsel for the petitioner that most senior, eligible and fit officers of BPS-19 working as Director Administration of company cadre mentioned in the seniority list, notified by respondent No,2 PEPCO working in all 14 corporate entities were given promotion for the post of Administration/HR Director BPS-20 in respondent No,3 HESCO and said post has been allowed to be retained by respondent No,4 on contract bases since 2008 and time to time extended without any lawful justification thereby depriving the eligible officers. The learned counsel for petitioner has referred to PLD 2010 Supreme Court 841, Abid lqbal Hafiz and others v. Secretary Public Prosecution Department, Government of Punjab and 2010 PLC (C.S.) 760, Majid and others v. Dr. Israr Ahmed and others wherein the honourable apex Court has held that when a person who is otherwise fit and eligible may have legitimate expectancy of promotion in next cadre if he is eligible for the post of regular cadre and the same cannot be filled by way of contract for more than a year.
4. According to learned counsel for the petitioner the extended period of respondent No,4 has already expired on 30-6-2011 as such all the eligible and fit officers are having legitimate expectancy of their promotion but the respondent No,4 in connivance with respondent No,3 in patronage of respondent No,2 were trying to get his contract further extended for indefinite period in violation of rules, promotion policy and law interpreted by the honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan. The learned counsel for petitioner submitted that in presence of regular and career officers of the cadre who possess the requisite qualifications/ experiences, appointment of respondent No,4 on contract basis and extension in contract shall deprive them from their lawful promotion and in their career advancement which create resentment and distress amongst them.
According to promotion policy of PEPCO, an officer having experience of 17 years in BPS-19 and above is to be appointed/promoted in BPS-20 whereas respondent No,4, Adrnn/HR Director does not possess such experience in Government service.
5. Mr. Mujeeb Ahmed Pirzada, learned counsel for respondent No,4 submitted that petitioner is a Clerk of an advocate, a famous black mailer, has no authority to file the present petition. He urged that post of Admn./HR. Director was advertised by respondent No,3 nationwide and the respondent No,4 was selected through open competition on merit and was recommended for the said post by legally constituted Selection Board of respondent No,2 PEPCO after fulfillments of codal formalities.
The learned counsel has referred to the advertisements published in daily 'Dawn' and daily 'Jang'
Karachi for the post of Admn. And H.R Director issued on 1st September, 2007 by the Chief Executive Officer of respondent No,3 and also referred to Para No,4 of the memo. Of petition and submitted that there are no service rules and respondent No,3 has not been given autonomy as yet. The learned counsel has also referred to the letter of HR Director PEPCO dated 29th, May 2011 to the Director Human Rights Cell, Supreme Court of Pakistan regarding the illegal extension in contract service of Admn./HR Director (BPS of respondent No,3) enclosed with counter affidavit of respondent No,2 PEPCO wherein it is stated that:--- "(1) PEPCO has a mandate under PM Executive Orders of October 24, 1998 for bringing corporate change in the Companies by inducting professionals from market on market salary package. The first tier of management in the Companies contains a position of Admn. And HR Director, specifically provided for leading the corporate change in the Companies under Power Sector Reforms like other management positions as Finance Directors/Technical Directors/Operation Directors. Neither any retired officer has been re-employed as Admn and HR Director nor has anyone of this category been given extension. Rather those posts are filled as a result of market search and selection through competitive selection by advertising the positions in the National Press.
(2) The extensions against the corporate positions recruited/inducted by Companies/PEPCO are decided by MD PEPCO being the competent authority on the basis of performance and recommendation of CEO concerned. Extension to Mr. Suhail Ahmed Khatian has been given by the competent authority in accordance with the merit of the case and performance of the officer.
(3) The position of Admn and HR Director HESCO is not a promotion post and hence not part of any Service Rules. No service rules have been attached in support of the complaint. There is no Admin and HR cadre in any of the fourteen Companies, question of maintaining the seniority on above cadre is not relevant;
(4) The anonymous complaint appears to be from Admn. Cadre officers, the promotion of Admn Officers in BPS-18 to 19 is made on Seniority-Cum-Fitness director (Admn) under WAPDA Administrative Cadre Service Rules, 1983 and Seniority basis from amongst the officers of Admn.
Cadre."
6. The learned counsel for respondent No,4 has also referred to the letter dated 25-6-2011 by Chief Executive Officer HESCO to the Managing Director PEPCO regarding extension of service of contract of respondent No,4 whereby he recommended that as per clause II of the contract agreement his service in contract may be extended for further period of one year. The said letter is enclosed along with statement filed by respondent on 10-2-2012. He further submits that the General Manager HR PEPCO vide his letter dated 29-6-2011 to the Chief Executive Officer of respondent No,2 HESCO by approval of competent authority extended the service contract of respondent No,4 for one year w,e,f, 1-7-2011 to 30-6-2012.
7. The learned counsel for respondent No,4 submitted that writ petition has been filed beyond the limitation period. Petitioner neither is an employee of PEPCO or HESCO nor representative/attorney of any officer of PEPCO/HESCO and none of the 09 directors who are still serving with PEPCO/HESCO in their own cadre/grades have challenged the contractual appointment of respondent No,4.
8. It is also argued by learned counsel that after bifurcation of WAPDA in companies like PEPCO, HESCO, LESCO, FESCO, IESCO, QESCO, SESCO, etc. The Companies in order to compete with other multi-national Companies of the Country prepared its own Policies under which a post of Director HR was created and special criteria as that of academia, experience and status was approved for recruitment and being non-regular post, the Policy was framed and the respondent No,4 selected by a duly constituted Selection Board and his selection was exclusively on merit.
9. Mr. Zahoor A. Baloch, learned counsel for respondent No,1 while adopting and supporting the arguments of Mr. Mujeeb Pirzada, learned counsel for respondent No,4, states that the petitioner as well as the intervenor are not aggrieved person. He further contended that petitioner being office staff of an advocate has been hired by intervener Tarique Majeed Memon to file the present petition in order to develop pressure upon PEPCO and HESCO. It is contended that earlier the same issue was agitated by one Imam Ali through an application to Human Rights Cell of honorable Supreme Court of Pakistan which was duly replied. He contended that post of Administration and HR Director HESCO has been filled up after completion of codal formalities.
10. Syed Javed I. Bukhari, learned counsel for respondent No,3/ HESCO submitted that HESCO has already filed comments on 17-8-2011 in the present petition and in paragraph 10 of the said comments it is stated that in fact the respondent No,3 is not going to extend the contract of respondent No,4, on the contrary, unanimous resolution has been passed on 30-6-2011 by Board of Directors of respondent No,3 in its 69th meeting in which proposal of permanent absorption in service of respondent No,4 was turned down and further extension in contract service was refused.
The respondent No,4 applied for permanent absorption as Admn. And HR Director of HESCO on regular basis w,e,f, 1-7-2011. Board of Governors discussed items at length and unanimously and out rightly refused to consider the proposal on the plea that, the position of Admn and HR Director in PEPCO and it's all alive entities is a regular cadre position which as per Promotion Policy is to be filled up by way of promotion from the eligible senior most regular officers of Admn cadre from the respective seniority list of those officers who are working in BPS-19 on the basis of combined seniority list maintained by the PEPCO and they are possessing the service experience of more than 17 years (required for promotion) as Admn and HR Director. The Board of Directors has given decision that; HESCO is, not going to permanently absorb service of respondent No,4 even on contract for further period.
11. Mr. Tarique Majeed Memon, the intervenor has also argued and submitted that by virtue of his seniority in HESCO, the intervenor become the senior most officer in BPS-19 meeting all the requirements for promotion to the post of Admn. And HR Director in BPS-20 and the grant of extension of contract of Admn and HR Director to the respondent No,4 was/is in complete negation of policy of PEPCO and when he raised objection for illegal appointment of extension of contract of respondent No,4 in sheer contravention of the transfer policy of PEPCO, he had been transferred by respondent No,3 HESCO to Jamshoro Power Company Limited which is completely a separate corporate and registered body. He supported the contents of petition and contended that he is an aggrieved party and therefore, be joined as one of the petitioner.
12. Mr. Muhammad Ali Shaikh, learned D.A.-G also supported the arguments advanced by learned counsel for respondent No,2.
13. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
The present petition has been filed on 29-6-2011. From the comments of counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No,3 HESCO, it appears that on 30th June 2011, meeting of Board of Directors of HESCO was held at Hyderabad. Agenda No,9 of that meeting was to consider and approve permanent absorption of Mr. Suhail Ahmed Khatian/respondent No,4 as Admn and HR Director in HESCO on regular post w,e,f, 1-7-2011. The Board discussed the item at length and unanimously and outrightly refused- to consider the proposal on the plea that position of Admn and HR Director in PEPCO and in its all alive entities is a regular cadre position which as per policy is to be filled up by way of promotion from eligible senior most regular officers of appointment cadre from the respective seniority list. All these officers were working in BPS 19 on the basis of combined seniority list maintained by PEPCO and they are possessing the service experience of more than 17 years required for appointment as Admn and HR Director and the decision of the board was that the Board of Directors turned down the proposal of permanent absorption of respondent No,4 in service unanimously and also did not allow/approve further extension even in contract service in respect of Mr. Suhail Ahmed Khatian after 30-6-2011. The minutes of 69th meeting of Board of Directors of HESCO held on 30-6-2011 have been enclosed as Annexure 'W-1' with the comments of the respondent No,1 filed on 17-11-2011 along with supporting affidavit. The respondents Nos.2 and 4 have not filed any counter affidavit to the comments of the respondent No,3/HESCO nor challenged the unanimous decision of the Board of Directors of HESCO before any Court/Authority. The meeting of Board of Directors dated 30-6-2011 was attended by Mr. Muzzafar Ali Abbasi, C.E.O of HESCO Hyderabad therefore, recommendatory letters dated 25-6-2011 and 29-6-2011 of the C.E.O HESCO Hyderabad and G.M. PEPCO for further extension of respondent No,4 of his contract has no value in the eyes of law.
14. To maintain the constitutional petition in High Court, it is not necessary for the petitioner to have a right in strict sense but it is enough if the petitioner discloses the sufficient or personal interest for performance of some legal duty. The concept of locus standi has been whittled down and accordingly the term "sufficient interest" has to be given a generous interpretation. Even otherwise Mr. Tarique Majeed who is being joined as a party is an aggrieved person.
15. The intervener claims that in overall seniority of administration cadre based on all Pakistan basis, his name is in the seniority list. We are also informed by the learned counsel appearing for respondents Nos.2 and 3 that in all the alive entities except in HESCO, the position of Admn. & HR Director has been filled up by way of promotion and not on contract basis.
16. In view of the fact that on the next day of filing of the present petition i,e, 30-6-2011, the Board of Directors of HESCO (respondent No,3) in its 69th meeting has turned down the proposal of permanent absorption of respondent No,4/Mr. Suhail Ahmed Khatian in service unanimously and did not allow/approve further extension in contract service of respondent No,4. The decision taken by Board of Directors of HESCO in its 69th meeting is such which covers the relief sought by the petitioner and intervenor Mr. Tarique Majeed in the present petition. Since the intervener is also an aggrieved party therefore, he is impleaded as a petitioher in the present petition. We have heard the entire petition at Katcha Peshi stage which is consequently allowed along with all listed applications.