MUHAMMAD QASIM KHAN, J.---Brief facts of the case are that petitioner applied for the post of SI advertised by Punjab Public Service Commission. After test and interview, he (petitioner) alongwith others qualified but despite recommendations by Punjab Public Service Commission, appointment letter was not issued to him by respondent No, 3, Inspector General of Police, Punjab, Lahore petitioner filed Writ Petition No, 26557/2014 in which vide order dated 3.10.2014, a direction was issued to decide the application/ representation of the petitioner after hearing the parties, then the impugned order dated 18.11.2014 was passed and petitioner was declined to be appointed just on the ground that he was not having good family background. Hence, this petition.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only query put in the application form was about the involvement or conviction of the applicant in any criminal case in Pakistan but no information about the family was required in this form so, later on, petitioner could not be deprived from his vested rights on flimsy ground of bad family reputation. Further adds that by 'using the word "Family", whole tribe could not be included, only real brothers and real sisters at the maximum could be included in the term "Family" and they are not involved in any criminal case. Further adds that one brother of the petitioner is Constable in police department and earlier the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Superintendent Jail which proves good character of the petitioner. Lastly adds that even the person who was involved in any criminal case is not closely related to the petitioner rather he has been acquitted from the charge by the learned Illaqa Magistrate.
3. On the other hand, learned Law Officer representing the respondents submits that department while recommending to PPSC for advertisement in clear terms mentioned that the candidate should have good family background. Further submits that the order passed on the direction of this Court in Writ Petition No, 26557/2014 clearly shows that the family members of the petitioner were involved in criminal cases and it is the choice of Master/Authority to appoint any person as per criteria laid down by the Master/Authority. Learned Law Officer also submit that the authority is' competent to frame rules, change rules at any stage and no restriction could be imposed on him.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Law Officer and perused the record.
5. Although, stance of respondents is that in recruitment rules, for eligibility "having good family B background", is prerequisite for appointment but from perusal of these rules and Police Order, 2002, it appears that the word "Family" has not been defined. Now for the definition of word "Family", I have to consult dictionary.
' In Black's Law Dictionary (Eighth Edition), the word "Family" has been defined as:---
(i) A group of persons connected by blood, by affinity, or by law, esp. Within two or three generations;
(ii) A group consisting of parents and their children; and
(iii) A group of persons who live together and have a shared commitment to a domestic relationship.
' Baby Krishnan Prafula C. Pant in his book WORDS & PHRASES (Second Edition 2007) after referring the word "family" with context of different statute and dictionaries defines as under:--- ' "Family" connotes a group of people related by blood or marriage. According to Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, 3rd Ed... The word "family" means the group consisting of parents and their children, whether living together or not; in wider sense, all those who are nearly connected by blood or affinity; a person's children regarded collectively; those descended or claiming decent from a common ancestor; a house, kindred, lineage; a race; a people or group of peoples.
According to Aristotle (Politics I), it is the characteristic of man that he alone has any sense of good and evil, or just and unjust, and the association of living beings who have this sense make a family and a State. It would follow from the above that the word "family" always signifies a group.
Plurality of persons is an essential attribute of a family. The general or ordinary accepted meaning of the word "family" as used in Compensation Act, means a group, comprising immediate Kindred, consisting of the parents and their children, whether actually living together or not (p. 343).
Similarly, in Webster's Third New International Dictionary, the word "family" is defined thus: Household including not only the servants but also the head of the household and all persons in it related to him by blood or marriage a group of persons of common ancestry. In Chambers Twentieth Century Dictionary (New Edition 1972), the word "family" has been defined thus: The household, or all those who live in one house (as parents, children, and servants): parents and their children. In Concise Oxford Dictionary (Sixth Edition), the same definition appears to have been given of the word "family" which may be extracted thus: Members of a household, parents, children, servants, etc., set of parents and children, or of relations, living together or not; person's children. All descendants of common ancestor................. A conspectus of the connotation of the term "family" which emerges from a reference to the aforesaid dictionaries clearly shows that the word 'family" has to be given not a restricted but a wider meaning so as to include not only the head of the family but all members or descendants from the common ancestors who are actually living with the same head". (Emphasis has been supplied).
6. Under Punjab Civil Services Pension Rules, 1963 for payment of amount of gratuity and family pension in the case of male government servants, the family only includes wife or wives, children of the government servant, widow or widows and children of deceased son of the government servant, son or sons include who have not attained the age of 24 years and a widow daughter, divorced daughter and unmarried sister of government servant.
7. Industrial Court West Pakistan in the light of relevant Labour Laws defined the family: "Family" includes immediate relatives solely dependent upon employees, e.g., parents, minor brothers and unmarried sisters. 1965 PLC 467 titled "MUHAMMAD MASOOM. GENERAL SECRETARY EMPLOYEES' UNION versus MESSRS PAK-AMERICAN FERTILIZERS LTD. DAUDKHEL".
In a Division Bench judgment reported in 1991 M LD 250 (Lahore) titled "Mst. ARJUMAND BANO versus Ch. ALI MUHAMMAD" the family was defined as:--- "There are many general words in common usage in the law which have no precise or constant meaning but few have been used with so many shades of meaning in different contexts or have so freely acquired new meanings with the development of the law as the word 'family". It is a popular and not a technical expression and indeed much turns upon the context in which it has been used. This is so because the family is a social unit and its meaning has changed from age to age and society to society.
' In its broad general sense, the word "family" means a group of persons consisting of parents and children; a collective body of persons who live in one house and under one head or management.
(Per Mukerji J. In Nil Kamal v. Kamakshva Charan AIR 1928 Cal. 539=109 IC 67 and Black's Law Dictionary. Fifth edition)".
8. As most of the above definitions which have been reproduced relate to the dictionaries, terms and phrases edited and complied by the persons and laws relate to the non-Muslim societies and some of the laws in India before partition adopted by the Government of Pakistan, the definition of `family" is influenced by Hindu law; hence, it is necessary that word 'family" must be examined in the context of Islamic law and, if need, re-interpreted accordingly. In this regard their Lordships in 1991 M LD 250 observed that:- "The parties here being Muslims, the expression must be understood in the context of an Islamic society; and if need, be re-interpreted accordingly, for, to quote from the preamble of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, "it is the will of people of Pakistan to establish an order wherein the Muslims shall be enable to order their lives in the individual and collective spheres in accordance with the teachings and requirements of Islam as set out in the Holy Quran and Sunnah". We do not, therefore, think that the concept of "undivided family", as understood in Hindu law, has any relevance in an Islamic society".
' Their Lordships also observed that:-- "The Islamic law "does not allow the conception of a family life to overshadow its fundamental principle, namely, individual responsibility_ and liberty. Each member of the family is endowed with full legal capacity and the law does not sanction any joint family system of holding property as is prevalent among the Hindus. Whatever authority the law vests in the head of the family is based either on contract or on necessity for the protection of those members of the family who are unable to take care of themselves." (The Principles of Muhammadan Jurisprudence by Sir Abdur Rahim at page 326). This is because "as soon as an owner dies. succession to his property opens.
There is no State intervention or clergy's intervention needed for the passing of the title immediately to the heirs (Emphasis has been supplied).
9. Hence, it appears that the family defined for payment of gratuity and family pension under Punjab Civil Services Pension Rules, 1963 is according to the principles of Islam because it includes those members who are dependent on the family head and by careful examination of above definitions, the word "family" in an Islamic Country includes parents, children if dependent on the parents, children's children, if dependent on grand-parents and maximum could extend as per values of our society unmarried sisters, widows/ divorced sisters, wife of deceased son, wife of son of the deceased son but the word "family" could not include the whole tribe.
10.Now coming to the facts of the case in hand. The petitioner has appended his pedigree-table attested by Nazim of union council concerned and Lumberdar of Mauza, this pedigree-table includes the paternal cousins of the petitioner. None of the persons mentioned in pedigree-table are involved in any criminal case and the person referred by the respondents being involved in a criminal case is not closely related to the petitioner as is evident from the pedigree-table appended by the petitioner.
11.We are living in a civilized society under the Umbrella of Constitution and Law, where legislation can be made or SOP could be issued only in the light of contract between the people of Pakistan and the State i,e, the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 and no Law/Rules/Regulations/SOPs could grab the fundamental rights protected by the Constitution; hence, the authority cannot be permitted to crush the rights and dignity of man on his whims without any justification. Every person is responsible for his act and conduct and no liability can be fixed on the basis of blood or family relationship and no one could be penalized only due to the reason that some of his relatives have been changed/indicted. Hence, the stance of respondents to enhance the family and extend it to a tribe is not permitted by law as the meaning of family adopted by the respondents could not find out any support from the law.
12. It is also the principle of natural justice and the principle of Islam that every person is responsible for his own act and he will be awarded according to his characteristics and on the "Day of Judgment" his recital/performance will be on his right hand. Whether a person is liable to be penalized for the act of other, the Allah Almighty once for all has decided this issue in "Holy Quran". Some references of the Holy Quran (translated in English by Justice Mufti Taqi Usman are given below:--- Allah does not obligate anyone beyond his capacity. For him is what he has earned, and on him what he has incurred.
(Al-Baqra-286)
(It was) that no bearer of burden shall bear the burden of the other, and a man shall not deserve but (the reward of) his own effort.
(An Najant-38-391.
' No one will bear the burdett of someone else. Az-Zummur-7)
He said: "We seek Allah's refuge from keeping anyone other than him with whom we have found our thing, otherwise we shall be unjust."
(Yousaf-79).
' Further elaboration of the Orders of Almighty Allah is originated from the following Hadiths:--- Chapter 2. A Man Is Not To Be Punished For The Wrongs Done By His Father or Brother.
4495. It was narrated that Abu Rimthah said: "I went to the Prophet (S.A.W.) with my father, then the Prophet (S.A.W) said to my father: "Is this your son?" He said: "Yes, by the Lord of the Ka'bah. "
He said "Is it true? " He said: "I bear witness to it. " The messenger of Allah (S.A.W.) smiled at my resemblance to my father and my father's oath concerning me, then he said: "Yout are not accountable for his wrongdoing, and he is not accountable for yours. " And the Messenger of Allah (S.A. W.) recited the Verse: "No bearer of burdens shall bear the burden of another".
Ref: (Sun= Abu Dawud (V-5).
Moreover. The Holy Prophet (S.A.W.). at the time of The Khutbah of Hajj-ul-Wida said: "Now an accused will be responsible for his act. Now, neither, the son will be nabbed for the sins of his father nor the father can be held answerable for the misdeed of his son".
13.For what has been discussed above, as in the Statute/Rules/Policy/SOPs no definition of family has been provided; hence, the word "family" could not include the whole tribe and at the maximum it could include the family under the context of Islamic law as observed above.
14.Admittedly, neither the petitioner nor his father or brothers are involved in any criminal case; hence, by no imagination petitioner could be declared having not good family reputation or his family belongs to a bad character family or a man supporting the criminals in society. Anyhow, if during service, it is found that an employee is not fulfilling his duties or that his working is bringing bad name to the department, the authority may proceed against him, but no person could be debarred from services on the basis of presumptions or due to involvement of any person from his tribe in a criminal case. The act of respondents is violative of Article 4 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Petitioner has been deprived from the right of life, which includes the right to earn, right to work, right to serve, right to be appointed after selection on merit, and for the same reason, act of respondents is also violative of Article 9 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Hence, this petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 18.11.2014 is hereby, set aside and respondents are directed to implement the recommendations of Punjab Public Service Commission in letter and spirit without any loss of time.
15. Let copy of this judgment be sent to respondents No, 2 & 3 who are advised to revisit the definition of "Family" in the light of above observations.