AYESHA A. MALIK, J.---This judgment decides upon the issues raised in the instant I.C.A. as well as in I.C.A. No,189/2013 arising out of the judgment dated 19.09.2012 passed in W.P. No,23977/2011 as well as on the issues raised in W.P. No,22283/2016 as they are all interconnected.
2. The Appellant in I.C.A. No,188/2013 is the Government of Punjab whereas the Appellants in I.C.A.
No,189/2013 are regular employees of Bureau of Statistics working in BS-17 and BS-18. The Petitioners in W.P. No,22283/2016 are contract employees, who were appointed as Assistant Director in BS-17 and Deputy Director in BS-18 in the Development Scheme titled Restructuring/Revamping and Strengthening of Punjab Bureau of Statistic ("the Project").
3. The dispute before the Court is with regard to the right of regular employment against the post in BS-17 and in BS-18 versus the right to promotion of the regular employees. The Government of Punjab is aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 19.09.2012, which allowed W.P. No,23977/2011 filed by contract employees working for the Project, who sought regularization against their seats in BS-17 and BS-18, as the Project was transferred from the development side to non-development SNE i.e Schedule of New Expenditure and consequently 126 posts were created w.e.f. 01.07.2011 out of which 30 posts are gazetted. The dispute pertains to the ten gazetted posts in BS-17 and ten seats in BS-18.
4. The Respondents in I.C.A. No,188/2013 and the Petitioners in W.P. No,22283/2016 claim that they were recruited for the Project on a one year contract, which was subject to extension on annual basis. Their contracts were regularly extended uptil 30.12.2011 after which it is their case that since the posts were transferred to the non-development side, meaning .thereby that their posts have become permanent, hence their employment is deemed to have become permanent as well. The Respondents and the Petitioners rely upon judgment dated 05.05.2014 passed by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan in C.As. Nos,275 and 276 of 2014 in which it is held that where development project is transferred to the non-development side and it becomes a permanent department of the Government, the employees having been appointed through a regular process are entitled to be considered for permanent employment against their seats. It is the case of these Respondents and the Petitioners that they are entitled to be treated as regular employees against their seats and at best a scrutiny committee can check their credentials for the purposes of permanent employment.
5. The Appellants in I.C.A. No,189/2013 are aggrieved by the impugned judgment as they are regular employees of Bureau of Statistics who are in line for promotion to BS-17 and BS-18. It is their contention that in terms of Punjab Bureau of Statistics Recruitment Rules, 1985 ("Rules"), the seats in the Bureau of Statistics are subject to 75:25 ratio wherein 75% of the seats are to be filled in by promotion from amongst the Assistant Directors in BS-17 and BS-18 and only 25% of the seats are to be filled in by initial recruitment. It is their case that with respect to the seats for BS-17 and BS-18 they are entitled to be promoted against the 75% seats and any vacancy that is to be filled in through initial recruitment is limited to 25% of the seats. Therefore, they claim a right of promotion against the post of Assistant Director BS-17 and Deputy Director BS-18 and if their 20 seats are allocated in favour of the Petitioners of W.P. No,22283/2016 and Respondents in I.C.A. No,188/2013 such that they are regularized against these posts, their right of promotion will be adversely prejudice, which is against the spirit of the law.
6. On behalf of the Government of Punjab, it is argued that on 31.01.2008 the posts of BS-17 and BS- 18 were advertised for, the Project initially for a period of one year, however, the contracts were extended from time to time uptil the completion of the Project on 30.06.2011. On 28.05.2011 one hundred and twenty-six (126) posts were created as the Project moved from the development side to the non-development side. Out of these seats, 30 seats are for gazetted officers, out of which the dispute relates to ten seats in BS-18 and BS-17 respectively. It is the case of the Government of Punjab that on the creation of these 126 seats SNE posts are to be filled in accordance with the Rules meaning thereby that they are subject to the 75:25 ratio such that only 25% of the seats are to be filled in by initial recruitment. Hence, the Respondents in I.C.A. No,188/2013 and the Petitioners in W.P. No,22283/2016 can be adjusted against 25% of the seats and no more. They rely on a Summary for the Chief Minister dated 23.06.2011 in which it is stated that the gazetted staff working in the Project on contract basis including Assistant Director BS-17 and Deputy Director BS-18 may be referred to the Punjab Public Service Commission ("PPSC") for determining their suitability for appointment against SNE posts. The proposal in the summary was approved such that the posts in BS-16 and above may be filled as per service Rules and on the recommendations of the PPSC through open competition. Hence as per their contention, the vacant seats are subject to the Rules where the 75:25 ratio is applicable. They also rely on Appointment Policy dated 10.11.2010 for contract employees, who are to be appointed on a regular basis and are to be appointed on the recommendations of the selection committee as per the provision of the service Rules. It is their case that the policy also shows that the Rules are relevant. It is also argued that the impugned judgment did not consider the fact that vacancies in the Bureau of Statistics against the newly created posts in BS-17 and BS-18 are to be filled in accordance with the Rules and that the contract employees can be considered against the permanent post subject to the requirement of the Rules.
Therefore, the impugned judgment failed to take into consideration the fact that the contract employees can only be considered against 25% seats for initial recruitment as 75% of the seats must be filled through promotion. Learned Law Officer argued that effectively the impugned judgment requires all the seats to be filled in through initial recruitment which means that the employees of the department, who are waiting for promotion will not be promoted, hence being against the mandate of the Rules. It is their case that the contract employees have to appear before the PPSC as only the seats have been regularized and made permanent and the contract employees at best have a right to be considered against those seats subject to the Rules.
7. Heard and record perused.
8. The basic issue before the Court is with respect to filling up of the permanent seats in BS-17 and BS-18 in Bureau of Statistics. The contention of the Respondents in both the appeals and the Petitioners of W.P. No,22283/2016 is that they are entitled to be considered for the purposes of regularization against the seats, which have been made permanent because they were all Project employees and since the Project is now on the non-development side, they have a right to be considered for permanent employment. In this regard, they have relied upon the judgment dated 05.05.2014 passed by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan in C.As. Nos,275 and 276 of 2014 wherein it has been held that contract employees are entitled to be considered for permanent employment for the non-development department. In that case, the Court held that since the department has become a permanent department of the Government the contract employees must be considered for regular appointment against the vacant seats. We are of the opinion that there is no cavil to the findings of the judgment of the august Supreme Court of Pakistan and that contract employees may be considered against the available vacant seats in the department, however there will be subject to the Rules. The Rules clearly prescribes a 75:25 ratio in terms of which only 25% of the seats can be filled in through the recruitment process and the remaining 75% of the seats have to be filled in through promotion. Therefore, the contract employees will be considered against 25% of the seats being the available seats for regularization of the contract employees. The Appellants in I.C.A. No,189/2013 are permanent employees of the department, who have been waiting for their promotion and they have a right under the Rules to be considered for promotion against available vacant seats as per the given ratio. Under the circumstances, we find that although the impugned judgment gives the Respondents in both the appeals and the Petitioners of W.P. No,22283/2016 a right to be considered against the vacant seats, it is clarified that the department can only fill up 25% of those seats while the remaining will have to be filled up through promotion as prescribed under the Rules.
9. In this regard, we have also looked at the Appointment Policy dated 10.11.2010 and the summary for the Chief Minister dated 23.06.2011, which is specifically with reference to the approval of the Project under transfer to the non-development side which also proposes that vacancies should be filled in as per Rules. It goes without saying that the Rules prescribe for the manner in which the seats of the department are to be filled up and simply because a Project has been converted and shifted to the non-development side it does not mean that recruitment to the permanent department will not be subject to the Rules. Once the Project becomes permanent and 126 seats were made regular then the regular seats are subject to the Rules of the department. The contract employees have a right to be considered which they will be by the PPSC, however, the seats will be filled as per the Rules which means PPSC will recommend candidates to fill up 25% of the seats. In this regard the judgment dated 05.05.2014 passed by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan in C.As. Nos, 275 and 276 of 2014 simply finds that contract employees have a right to be considered, however it does not provide that the recruitment process shall be contrary to the prescribed Rules.
10. Under the circumstances, I.C.As. Nos, 188 and 189 of 2013 are accepted and W.P. No, 22283 of 2016 is dismissed.