Mudassir Khalid Abbasi, J.: Through this constitutional petition, a direction is sought that Rule 17-A of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service), Rules 1974 does not debar petitioners/children of serving or retired civil servants or to get employment under 20% reserved quota for Class- IV employees.
2. Precisely , facts of the case are that in response to an advertisement dated 12.03 .2017, petitioners applied for the posts of Naib Qasid, Maali, Beldar , Chowkidar , Conductor , Sanitary Worker & Sweeper etc. In terms of Recruitment Policy , 2004 issued by the Government of Punjab, 20% quota was reserved for the children of retired or serving employees of the respondents/College Wing. After going through all the procedural requirements and codal formalities, petitioners at an advanced stage were detached from the recruitment process on the ground that their brothers/sisters have already got employment under Rule 17-A of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service), Rules 1974, therefore, they cannot be appointed agains t 20% reserved quota. Feeling aggrieved petitioners have invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that no other brothers/sisters of the petitioners have availed benefit of 20% reserved quota nonetheless, one of the brothers of the petitioners has got employment under Rule 17-A of the Rules ibid. Further contends that administrative powers given under statute or otherwise are legislated for removing the hardships meted out to the citizens in discharge of their functions, however, in present case, the requisite authority vests with the respondents No.3 to 13 cannot be restricted or interpreted in limited sense, rather the interpretation most beneficial to the citizens should have been adopted. States that actions of respondents No.3 to 13 of excluding the petitioners from appointment process are highly irrational, unreasonable and in negation of true spirit of Recruitment Policy, Constitution and judgments of Hon'ble Apex Courts. Argued that impugned act on the part of respondents, by not appointing petitioners runs in direct conflict with Article 4, 9 and Article 25 of Constitution of Pakistan, 1973. Lastly, prayed that petition be allowed declaring the exclusion of petitioners from recruitment process, illegal, discriminatory and encroachment over the fundamental rights of the petitioners.
4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Advocate General has vehemently opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners on the ground that candidature of the petitioners was rejected by the recruitment committee because they applied under 20% reserved quota for which they were not eligible as their other family members have already availed their right under Rule 17-A of Rules ibid, therefore, they cannot be given double benefit. Further contends that the doctrine of legitimate expectations does not apply here as for what they claim is not their right. Lastly, prayed that petition being not maintainable be dismissed.
5. Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. Primary question involved in this case is that as to whether the petitioners are entitled to be considered for appointment under 20% quota of retired/serving employees being son of serving or retired employees when one of their relative brother/sister has already been appointed under Section 17-A of the Punjab Civil Serva nts (Appointment and Conditions of Service), Rules 1974
7. In order to resolve the controversy , it would be expedient to reproduce Rule 17-A of the Rules ibid which reads as under:- "17.A. Notwithstanding anything contained in any rule to the contrary , whenever a civil servant dies while in service or is declared invalidated/incapacitated for further service, one of his unemployed children or his widow/wife may be employed by the Appointing Authority against a post to be filled under rules 16 and 17 for which he/she possesses the prescribed qualification and experience and such child or the widow/wife may be given 10 additional marks in the aggregate by the Public Service Commission or by the appropriate Selection Board or Committee provided he/she otherwise qualifies in the test/examination and/or interview for posts in BS-6 and above. Provided further that one child or widow/wife of a Government servant who dies while in service or is declared invalidated/incapacitated for further service shall be provided a job against posts in BS-1 to 5 and the posts of Junior Clerks (BS-7) in the department in which the deceased Government servant was working, without observance of formalities prescribed under the rules/procedure. Provided such child 30or the widow/wife is otherwise eligible for the post."
8. Independent of the afore-referred rule, recruitment policy issued by the respondents stipulate that 20% quota shall be reserved for class-IV retired/serving employees. This has also been incorporated in the advertisement published for the recruitment of said posts at the strength of notification No.SOR-III(S&GAD)2-74/2008 dated 05.11.2011 which is reproduced as under:- "In exercise of the powers conferred upon him by Section 23 of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974 (VIII of 1974), and in supersession of Notification No.SOR.III-2-74/2008 dated 21.08.2009, Governor of the Punjab is pleased to direct that 20% vacancies in the cadre of Junior Clerk, Patwari, Driver, Beldar, Naib Qasid, Mali, Frash Water Carrier and Chowkidar in all Government Deaprtments shall stand reserved for the children of such Government servants in BS-1-5 and Junior Clerks (BS-7) and Patwaris (BS-9), who are either sreving in the respective department/cadre or have retired. The elegibility criteria for selection to the reserved posts shall be as follows:- Nomenclature of postCriteria for selection Patwari (BS-9) All the posts of Patwaris falling in the quota shall be filled strictly in merit as per recruitment policy in vogue.
Junior Clerk (BS-7)All the posts of Junior Clerks falling in this quota shall be filled strictly on merit as per recruitment policy in vogue.
Driver (BS-4) Only those candidates who possess valid driving license shall be eligible for the post of Driver .
Respective Department Selection Committees shall conduct driving tests of all eligible candidates.
Beldar (BS-1) The basic criteria for recruitment to the post of Beldar shall be:- a) Height 5', 6" or above; b) Chest 33" or above; c) Test of Kassi work; d) Racing rest; and e) Swimming test.
Naib Qasid/Mali / Frash / W ater Carrier /The length of service of the parent whose son is a candidate shall be the sole criteria for determining Chowkidar (BS-1).inter se merit of the candidates.
Provided that: i) Only one child of a Government servant can avail the benefit of employment under the said quota for the children of Government employees in BS-1-5 including Junior Clerks (BS-7)/Patwaris (BS-9); for the purpose, an affidavit shall be obtained from the concerned employees that none of his children has previously been appointed under the said quota; ii) The vacancies shall be filled through the respective Departmental Recruitment Committees at the time of general recruitment; iii) the District cadre posts will be filled from amongst the candidates having the domicile of that district; and iv) if none is available for appointment against the reserved quota, the post shall be filled through direct recruitment on open merit."
9. Afore-cited notification is in continuation of Recruitment Policy , 2004 wherein the said quota was prescribed.
Subsequently , from time to time, respondents have been publishing various notification/policy decisions in this regard. In the year 2005, respondents were confronted with somewhat similar proposition and had to sought advice from the Regulation Wing, Services and General Administration Department, Government of Punjab, whereupon notification was issued on 28.05.2005 which reads as under:- "GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB SERVICES AND GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT (REGULATIONS WING)
To The Section Officer (Personnel-III), Government of the Punjab, Lahore.
Memo.No.SOR.IV(S&GAD)9-1/03(P-1) Dated Lahore the 28 May 2005.
Subject: APPOINTMENT OF NAIB QASID AGA INST 20% QUOT A RESERVED FOR THE CHILDREN OF PUNJAB CIVIL SECRET ARIA T EMPLOYEES (BS-1 T O BS-5.
Kindly refer to your letter No. SOP .III(S&GAD) 1-15/2004 dated 23.02.2005 on the subject noted above.
2. The Personnel Wing sought advice of the Regulations Wing as to whether such candidates whose brothers/sisters have already availed the benefit under Rule 17-A of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment & Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974 will be considered against 20% quota reserved for the children of Punjab Civil Secretariat employees BS-1 to 5. The matter was referred to the Law Department for its advisory opinion, which has observed as under: "The benefits granted under rule 17-A of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment & Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974 is a special relief granted to one child or widow of civil servant who dies while in service or declared invalidated/incapacitated by the compe tent authority . Whereas 20% quota reserved for the children of serving/retired government employees against the posts in BS-1 to BS-5 is general relief granted to all serving/retired government servants without any discrimination and limitation of their children. Therefore, both reliefs can easily be dealt with independently and cannot be interlinked, intermingled or interconnected with each other . However , it is clarified that one child/widow , who gets the service under Rule 17-A cannot claim against 20% quota reserved for the children of serving/retired government employees simultaneously ."
3. The Personnel Wing of S&GAD is advised to proceed further keeping in view of the aforesaid advice of the Law Department.
SECTION OFFICER (R-IV)
CC The Executive District Officer (Revenue), Mianwali, with reference to his letter No.152/EDO(Rev)/HVC(R), dated 04.05.2005.
10. From the perusal of the afore-mentioned notifications, it becomes abundantly clear, firstly that 20% quota has been reserved for the children of Class-IV retired or incapacitated employees and Secondly, that benefit under Rule 17-A of Rules ibid is special relief to one child or widow of civil servant who died while in service or declared invalidated/incapacitated by the competent authority, twenty percent/20% quota reserved for the children of serving/retired government employees against the posts in BS-1 to BS-5 is a general relief granted to all serving/retired government servants without any discrimination. Therefore, these two benefits are altogether distinguished from each other. Neither any rule nor afore-referred notifications impose any such restriction that children of retired or serving employee whose son had availed the benefit in terms of Rule, 17-A of Rules ibid, other child shall not be entitled for appointment under 20% quota. The only clog imposed in the afore-referred notification dated 28.05.2005 is that child or widow who has already availed benefit under Rule 17-A of Rules ibid could not get employment under 20% quota simultaneously . There is no clog or restriction upon any other child/widow who has not availed such benefit.
11. By now it has become an established principle that the rules and policies are to be stretched in favour of getting employment if there is no express statutory restriction. While observing so, I take strength from the dictum laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in case titled "Postmaster General, Eastern Circle (EP), DACCA and Another v.
Muhammad Hshim" (PLD 1978 Supreme Court 61) , wherein it has been held as under:- "Rules capable of bearing a reasonable interpretation favourable to employee. Such Interpretation, held, to be preferred."th
12. Moreover , while adopting purposive approach in interpretation of statutes and policies, principle of remedial legislation is to be kept in mind where object, purpose and usefulness of such legislation must be protected so as to ensure that the relief contemplated by the statute or policy shall not be denied to the persons intended to be relieved. It should be construed in a manner so as to advance a remedy , avoidin g technical interpretation of the language used and to give it a fair construction to promote justice. Furthermore, beneficial dispensation was to be interpreted in a manner so as to advance the remedy . Reliance is placed on "Dr. Fozia Amber v. Government of Punjab and others " (PLD 2003 Lahore 741), "Muhammad Huzair Qureshi v. Province of Punjab through Secretary S&GAD, Lahore and another " (2015 PLC (C.S.) 1483 ) and "Postmaster General, Eastern Circle (E P), Dacca and another v . Muhammad Hashim " (PLD 1978 Supreme Court 61) .
As discussed above, I do not find any reason that the petitioners could not be considered for employment on the ground that one of their family member had already availed the benefit of Rule 17-A of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service), Rules 1974, therefore, this petition is allowed . Respondents are directed to consider the cases of the petitioners for appointment under 20% quota, if they are otherwise eligible.