MUHAMMAD TARIQ AFRIDI, J.- Through the instant writ petition under Article 199 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief: It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that on acceptance of this writ petition, this Honourable Court may very graciously issue direction to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner on his service with all back benefits and letter bearing No.B-1/invalid quota/ruling dated 18.02.2025 be declared as null and void. Any other relief, if any, also be granted.
2. The brief, but relevant facts of the case are that the petitioner's father Muhammad Akram was serving as a Postal Clerk in the Postal Services Department, but was invalidated and prematurely retired on medical ground on 17.10.2022. It is averred that the petitioner applied for appointment under the quota reserved for children of employees who retire on medical ground and was accordingly appointed as Postal Clerk on contract basis by the respondent-department vide order dated 01.11.2024. However, vide another order dated 18.02.2025, the respondent-department cancelled the petitioner's appointment, prompting him to petition this Court through the instant constitutional petition.
3. Arguments heard. Record perused.
4. It appears from the record that the petitioner's father was retired on medical ground vide order dated 17.10.2022. By then, a quota was reserved for children of employees who either die during service or retire on medical ground. It was under this quota that the petitioner was appointed as Postal Clerk on contract basis vide order dated 01.11.2024.
5. The impugned order dated 18.02.2025 reveals that the petitioner's appointment was cancelled in the light of judgment dated 18.01.2022 passed by the Islamabad High Court in WP No.1146/2022, wherein it was observed that the policy of offering employment under such a quota was whimsical, unconstitutional, and in violation of Article 25 of the Constitution.
6. We are also cognizant of the fact that the Supreme Court, in its judgment dated 18.10.2024 in Civil Petition No.3390 of 2021, has declared as discriminatory and ultra vires to Articles 3, 4, 5(2), 18, 25(1), and 27 of the Constitution, all the rules, policies, memorandums, etc., which provide for the appointment, without open advertisement, competition, and merit, of children and/or family members of employees who retire or die during service. The relevant portion of the judgment reads as under:
18. The widow / widower, the wife / husband and the dependent children of a civil servant who dies during service or becomes permanently disabled / invalidated / incapacitated for further service and takes retirement from service get pensionary and other benefits from the public exchequer, to which they are entitled. However, the above mentioned rules, policies, OMs, etc. which secure or provide appointments in different grades, without open advertisements and competition, to the widow / widower, wife / husband or a child of a civil servant of the Federal and Provincial Governments, who dies during service or becomes permanently disabled / invalidated / incapacitated for further service and takes retirement from service, is ex facie discriminatory against the other or ordinary citizens of Pakistan and the same cannot be termed as a reasonable classification as their object is to give an advantage by excluding others, which is not permissible under Article 25 of the Constitution. Article 27 of the Constitution which specifically attends to the service of Pakistan prohibits discrimination in services.
19. The Government and public sector employment cannot be allowed to be parceled out to the functionaries of the State. These jobs neither are nor can be made hereditary. The Constitution stipulates that equal employment and economic opportunities must be provided to all citizens.
Economic justice, if we may add, is a component of social justice which focuses on creating equal opportunities for all within a society in all aspects.
[...] Policies, office memorandums, employment under the Package of the Prime Minister, the Financial Assistance Package, Rule 11-A of the Sindh Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer)
Rules, 1974, Rule 10 (4) of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Civil servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1989, Rule 12 of the Balochistan Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 2009 or any other rule, policy, memorandum, etc. whereunder appointments without open advertisement, competition and merit, of the widow / widower, wife / husband or child of civil servants in different grades, who die during service or become permanently disabled / invalidated / incapacitated for further service and take retirement from service, are declared to be discriminatory and ultra vires Articles 3, 4, 5(2), 18, 25(1) and 27 of the Constitution. The prescribed Federal and Provincial authorities are directed to withdraw the same. However, it is clarified that the instant judgment shall not affect the appointments already made of the widow / widower, wife / husband or child of deceased or retired civil servants. It is further clarified that this judgment shall not affect the policies, rules or compensation packages of the Federal and Provincial Governments for the benefit of the legal heirs of martyred personnel of the law enforcement agencies and of civil servants who die on account of terrorist activities.
7. In addition, the Supreme Court in Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Agriculture, Peshawar and others v. Tahir Mushtaq and others (2025 PLC (C.S.) 34) also held as follows:
5. The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan prohibits discrimination as stated in Article 25 and further stipulates and entrenches the principle in respect of service of Pakistan in Article 27. In preferring the children of a government servant or reserving seats for them offends the Constitution. The same also detracts from a merit based system of employment. The taxpayers hard earned monies pay for the salaries, benefits and pensions of government servants. The people's interest lies in having the best person for the job, and not to suffer those who secure employment on the basis of a filial relationship. The stated instructions undermine transparency and good governance, therefore, the Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa will be well advised to withdraw all such instructions/notifications.
8. In the present case, the petitioner has unequivocally admitted in this petition that he was appointed under the son's quota. However, at the time of his appointment on 01.11.2024, the said quota had already been declared unconstitutional and unlawful by both the Islamabad High Court and the Supreme Court. Therefore, the petitioner's appointment was patently illegal, void ab initio, and coram non judice.
9. In view of the above legal position, the impugned order dated 18.02.2025 does not suffer from any legal infirmity or jurisdictional error warranting interference by this Court in the exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction. The petition, being devoid of any merit, is dismissed in limine.