AYSHA A. MALIK, J. This judgment decides upon the issue raised in the instant petition as well as in connected W.P. No.181148/2018 as common questions of law and facts are involved and Crl.Org.
No.122343-W/2017.
2. The Petitioner in W.P. No.109673/2017 has impugned orders dated 27.02.2017, 06.04.2017 passed by Respondent No. 4. Senior Headmistress, Government Muhammadia Girls High School, Data Nagar Badami Bagh, Lahore and orders dated 06.09.2017 and 06.11.2017 passed by respondent No.2, Secretary School Education Department, Civil Secretariat, Lahore. Her case is that she was appointed as Junior School Teacher ("JST") the in the education department, Government of Sindh in 1996. The Petitioner got married to Shoukat Ali resident of Lahore. Therefore, she applied for permanent inter provincial transfer from Government of Sindh to the Government of Punjab on wedlock policy. In this regard, Government of Sindh issued No Objection Certificate ("NOC") in her favour, however she has not been able to obtain permanent absorption into Government of Punjab despite her repeated request. The Petitioner therefore, sought deputation and has been working in the Province of Punjab on deputation, which was extended from time to time. Finally on 06.09.2017 the impugned order was issued terminated her deputation for being beyond the sanction time and requiring her to go back to her parent department i.e. Government of Sindh, (SGA&CD) Karachi for her further posting/adjustment. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed W.P.
No.70440/2017 before this Court in which a direction was issued on 15-9-2017 requiring Secretary School Education Punjab to hear the matter of the Petitioner and decide the same. The case was heard and Secretary School Education concluded that there is no provision of permanent absorption, in School Education Department, Government of the Punjab, hence the Petitioner was repatriated from the date or her expiry of extended deputation to her parent department for further posting.
3. The Petitioner in W.P. No.181148/2018 has impugned order dated 15.01.2018 passed by Respondent No.2, Secretary Specialized Healthcare and Medical Education Department. Her case is that she was appointed as Charge Nurse (BS-16) on 19.08.2000 and posted at Bolan Medical Complex Hospital, Quetta.
She got married at District Gujranwala in the year 2010 and after obtaining NOC from Secretary Health, Balochistan as well as from Secretary Health Punjab she applied for her inter provincial transfer from Quetta, Balochistan to Gujranwala; Punjab. Hence, the Petitioner was transferred on deputation for a period of three years vide order dated 17.03.2011, which was extended from time to time. Finally on 15.01.2018 the impugned order was issued which terminated her deputation for being beyond the sanctioned period and required her to return to her parent department i.e. Health Department, Government of Balochistan.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner argued that the matter with reference to permanent absorption has already been decided by this Court through judgment dated 13.05.2014 in W.P. No.7467/2012, order dated 22.10.2010 in W.P.
No.15348/2010 and by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan in "WAPDA through Chairman and others v. Abdul Ghaffar and others" (2018 SCMR 380). Therefore, in the light of the earlier precedents, learned counsel argued that the Petitioner is also entitled to permanent absorption in the civil service of the Government of Punjab.
5. Report and parawise comments have been filed by the Respondents. Learned Law Officer argued that there is no rule or regulation governing inter provincial transfer or absorption. He argued that there is no vested right to claim deputation or absorption and the department is dully authorized to repatriate the employee back to the parent department. Learned Law Officer further argued that the Petitioner's deputation has been extended from time to time beyond the required period and therefore, are not entitled to any further deputation or absorption. Reliance is placed on "Senate Secretariat through Chairman and another v. Miss Faiqa Abdul Hayee" (2014 SCMR 522) and order dated 19-2-2016 passed by this Court in W.P. No.18662/2015.
6. Heard and record perused. The basic contention of the Petitioner is that she is entitled to permanent absorption on the strength of Rule 20 of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974 ("1974 Rules "), which provides that in the case of a female government servant, who by virtue of para 7 of appendix 4 to the Civil Service Rules (Punjab) Vol.1 Part II acquires the domicile of her husband from the date of her marriage and follows the domicile of her husband during the marriage, exception can be made if authentic documentary proof (such as Nikah-nama) in case of Muslims or Marriage Certificate in case of others) is furnished.
This is the stated policy of the Government of Punjab in terms of its Rule SOR IV-8-25/78 dated 28.05.1979 on the basis of which several cases have been decided. In the case of a female government servant, who has acquired the domicile of her husband from the date of her marriage then such a female government servant who is desirous to transfer can be absorbed and accommodated without relaxation of rules in terms of the policy of the Government of Punjab. Learned Law Officer has relied upon several A cases, however , the cases relied upon especially 2014 SCMR 522 (supra) does not pertain to a female government servant, hence is distinguishable. On the given issue the august Supreme Court of Pakistan in "Amir Hamza v. Government of Balochistan and others" (2005 SCMR 1422 ) has already held that policy having statutory backing has attained the legal status and is required to be adhered to in letter and spirit by all the departments of Government. However , female government servant has been absorbed on the basis of this policy .
7. Under the circumstances, these petitions are allowed. The impugned orders are set aside and the Respondents are directed to issue permanent absorption orders of the Petitioners in the relevant departments immediately. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.