This judgment will dispose of constitution petitions bearing Nos. 4611-S/82, 4751-S/82, 4995-S/82, 4943-S of 1982 and No. I of 1983 as the questions of fact and law involved in all these petitions are one and the same.
2. The petitioners who are serving in connection with the affairs of the Federation, submitted Forms for admission to the Competitive Examination being held by the Punjab Public Service Commission (herein--after to be called `the Commission') for appointment against the posts of Civil Judges.
The Commission intimated the petitioners that they do not fulfil the conditions relating to age-limit as clause (v) added by Notification dated 14-6-1982 to the Punjab Civil Servants Recruitment (Relaxation of Upper Age, Limit) Rules; 1976, is not applicable to them and so they are not eligible to be admitted to the said Examination. This refusal made by the Commission was based on the letter No. SORIII-9-1/72 dated 26-10-1982 of the Additional Secretary (Regulation) Government of Punjab, wherein the Commission was advised that the word "Govern--ment Servant" used in clause (v) of rule 3 of the aforesaid Relaxation Rules, would mean "Government Servants of the Government of the Punjab" and 'not the employees of the Central or other Provincial Governments. The petitioners have challenged the refusal so made by the Commission in these petitions on the plea that the term "Government Servant" is to be assigned its usual and ordinary meaning and that this expression does not refer to or means the Servants of the Provincial Government. It was argued that had that been the intention the drafts--man would have used appropriate words, terms, phraseology so as to apply this expression to the civil servants or employees of the Punjab Government only. It was further argued that in the laws relating to Civil Servants, the expression "Government Servant" is not usually employed except in the Conduct Rules framed by the Federal and the Provincial Governments and there too the application of the Rules is restricted by specifying the extent of their application. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the frame of the Rule by using the expression "Government Servant" indented to confer benefit on all the Government Servants of the Province or of the Federation without discrimination.
3. In reply, the learned Assistant Advocate-General submitted that the term "Government Servant' means "servants of the Government of Punjab" in view of the fact that the Relaxation Rules were framed in exercise of the powers conferred under section 23 of the Punjab Civil Servants Act (VIII of 1974) which Act itself defines the term "Govern--ment" in clause (c) of section 2 as "the Government of the Punjab". According to him., the employees of the Federal Government or any of its agencies can at best seek benefit of clause 7 (c) of the Notification of the Commission dated 16- 5-1982 and in case their case is not covered under the said clause, they are not eligible to be admitted to the Examination. They admittedly cannot seek benefit of clause 7 (c) of the aforesaid Notifi--cation as they do not fulfil the conditions prescribed thereunder. They can be considered eligible and qualified only if clause (v) of rule 3 of the Relaxation Rules applies to them.
4. At this stage it may be stated that while admitting these petitions to hearing, the petitioners were allowed to take the Examination at their own risk and the Commission was ordered to issue Roll Numbers to the petitioners and to allow them to appear in the Examination subject to the result of these petitions and without prejudice to the pleas to be made.
5. The Competitive Examination has been held for appointment to the Posts of Civil Judges and the Rules applicable are called "the Punjab Civil Service (Judicial Branch) Rules, 1962". As provision regarding age---limit is provided in rule 6, the relevant part of it is reproduced :- "Rule 6. Age.-No person who is less than 21 years or more than 27 years of age shall be appointed to service by initial recruitment, provided that-
(i) ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
(ii) in the case of a Government Servant who has served in connec--tion with the affairs of the Centre or the Province of West Pakistan/ Punjab for a period of not less than four years, the upper age-limit shall be 35 years, and (i.e)
This very rule has been reproduced as one of the conditions of eligibility giving it No. 7 (c) in the Notification dated 16-5-1982 issued by the Commission laying down the procedure, syllabus and conditions for admission to the Examination. Besides these Rules, Governor of the Punjab in exercise of powers conferred by section 23 of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974, has framed the Rules called "The Punjab Civil Servants Recruitment (Relaxation of Upper Age Limit) Rules, 1976, vide Notification dated 1-4-1976. Clause (v) was added to rule 3 of these Rules vide Notification dated 14-6-1982.
This clause, as is being relied upon by the petitioners, is quoted for ready reference : - "3 (v) In the case of a candidate already working as a Government servant, the period of his continuous service as such shall, for the purpose of upper age, limit prescribed under any service rules of the post for which he is a candidate, be excluded from his age."
This was followed by a communication of the Government of Punjab Services, General Administration and Information Department, which reads as under : - "I am directed to refer to your letter No. PSC. 3C-IV-82/3245-C, dated the 26th September, 1982, on the above subject, and to state that the rules .To be interpreted i.e. The Punjab Civil Servants Recruitment (Relaxation of Upper Age Limit) Rules, 1976, includ--ing clause (v) of rule 3 having been framed under section 23 of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974, the definition of the word "Government" as given in clause (c) of subsection (1) of section 2 of the said Act will apply to the said Rules. Clause (c) ibid defines "Government" as "Government of the Punjab" and, therefore, the words "Government Servant" (which term has not been elsewhere defined) would mean Servants of the Government of the Punjab and none else. Clause (v) of rule 3 of 1976 Rules would, accord-- ingly, be applicable only in case of the servants of the Government of the Punjab and not to the employees of Central or other Provin--cial Government."
I have already given above the pleas and the arguments of the parties. The question which requires determination in these petitions is whether the expression "Government Servant" used in clause (v) of rule 3 of the Relaxation Rules applies to the Government Servants of the Provincial Government or it equally applies to Government Servants who have served or are serving in connection with the affairs of the Federation.
6. The expression usually used in the Civil Service Laws framed by the Provincial as well as Federal Government is "Civil Servants". It is also true that "Civil Post" means a post on civil side of Government as distinguished from military side and the term "Civil Servant" does not include a person who as employed on contract or on work-charged basis or who is paid from contingency or who is a worker or workman as defined in the Factories Act, 1934, or the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, or a person who is on deputation from the Federation or any Province or Authority or vice versa (See the Civil Servants Act, 1973, or the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974, for the definition of "Civil Servant". It is also true that according to Black's Law Dictionary (3rd Edition), the word "Government" among other things means the whole class or body of office-holders or functionaries considered in the aggregate upon whom devolves the executive, judicial, legislative and administrative business of the State.
7. The term "Government Servant" according to the above defini--tion would mean a person who is serving in Executive, Judicial Legis--lative and Administrative Business (including defence) of the State. This commonly understood acceptation., of the term "Government Servant" does not resolve the problem as from this meaning it does not flow that the said expression is used in the rule 3 (v) of the Relaxation Rules was not intended to be limited to the servants of Provincial Government alone. Hence the question is of finding the necessary intention of the framer of the Rule. The words, of a Statute speak the intention of the Legislature and the intention must be deduced from the, language used, for it is well accepted, that the beliefs and assumptions of those who frame Legislation cannot make the law. The rule of construction is "to intend the Legislature to have meant what they have actually expressed. If the words used are found deficient in achieving the intent for which law was framed then the remedy lies in amending the law by incorpo--rating proper words and appropriate phraseology. This deficiency cannot be supplied by issuing directions or by explaining the intention even by the framers of the statutory instrument, what to say of the interpreta--tion given by any officer in any of the Departments of the Government. The interpretation of clause (v) of rule 3 given in the letter dated 26-10-1982 by itself is of no consequence as it cannot limit the meaning of the term in case it is held that the term "Government Servant" was intended to apply to all Government Servants, Provincial as well as Federal. Now for determining the necessary intention, Legislative background of the Relaxation Rules may be traced. The law for the time being in force which regulates the appointment and the terms and conditions of service in respect of the services of the Province of Punjab is called, "the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974 (hereinafter to be called `the Act'). Section 23 of the Act confers power on the Governor or any person authorized in this behalf to make rules for carrying out the purposes of the Act. The rules competently made and in force at the time of commence--ment of the Act so far as these were not inconsistent with the provisions of the Act, were to be deemed to have been made under the Act and as such were to continue in force. In exercise of the power so conferred the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974 were framed. Rule 18 of these Rules being relevant is being quoted :- "
18. A candidate for initial appointment to a post must possess the prescribed educational qualifications and experience and also, except as provided in the rules framed for the purpose of relaxation of age limit, must be within the age limit as laid down for the post."
The rules framed for relaxation of age limit are "the Punjab Civil Servants Recruitment (Relaxation of Age Limit) Rules, 1976". To rule 3, clause (v) (reproduced in one of the paras above) was added. The Relax--ation Rules are to be read alongwith the Appointment and Conditions of" Service Rifles, 1974 and the Rules which prescribe the conditions of recruitment including age limit for the post in question.
As regards the posts of Civil Judges the relevant rule is rule 6 (reproduced in para. 5 above) of the Punjab Civil Service (Judicial Branch) Rules, 1962. Proviso (ii) of the Rule may be reproduced; "(ii) in the case of a Government Servant who has served in connec--tion with the affairs of the Centre or the Province of West Pakistan; Punjab for a period of not less than four years, the upper age---limit shall be ;5 years."
It will be noted that in this proviso the expression "Government Servant" has been used though in the rules framed for appointment to the posts in the other Departments this expression was not used. Reference is invited to the Rules of Education, Revenue, Excise and Taxation and Fisheries Departments framed in the year 1962. In these Rules the Rule as to age limit invariably reads as follows :- "Age.-No person. Shall be appointed to the Service unless-
(a) in the case of appointment by initial recruitment, he is more than twenty-one years and less than twenty-five years of age on the 1st of October, of the year in which the selection is made; and
(b) in the case of appointment made otherwise, he is less than fifty years of age on the Ist January of the years is which the appointment is made Provided that in the case of appointment by initial recruitment:-
(ii) in the case of person whose services under Government have been terminated for want of a vacancy, the period of service already rendered by him shall for the purpose of the upper age limit under this rule, be excluded from his age."
The words employed in relevant Rules are "persons whose services under Government" as even is the case of clause (ii) of rule 3 of the Relaxation Rules, 1976 wherein also the same words were used. The word "Government" has been defined as Government of West Pakistan now the Punjab as such the persons referred are those whose services were terminated by Government of West Pakistan/Punjab. But in the clause (v) of rule 3 of Relaxation Rules the words used in clause (ii) were not followed or repeated and instead the expression "Government Servant" was employed. The framer of the clause could have used the words "persons serving under the Government" to be consistent with the phraseo--logy used in clause (ii) of rule 3 or other Service Rules. In case of State v. Zia-ur-Rehman's (PLD1973SC49) Justice Hamoodur Rahman observed :-- "It is well-established order that Courts have to gather the intention of the Law-maker from the words used by it ; and if it has in two clauses of the same Article used different words, then it follows that its intention is not the same, particularly, where such .a conclu--sion also appears to be in consonance with reason and justice."
By using the expression "Government Servant" a term which is other--were not employed usually in the laws relating to Service matter, it cannot be urged on any reasonable hypothesis that the intention was to refer to persons in the Service of the Government of Punjab. To my mind the terns "Government Servant" was used in generic sense and the same is to be read with the relevant rules which prescribe age limit for a given post. The relevant Service Rules will indicate the persons who can be candidates for initial recruitment. If a person serving in connection with affairs of Federation can be a candidate, then the word "Government Servant" will cover these servants also and if the candidates referred to are only those who are serving in the Service of the Province of Punjab, then obviously the term would apply to Provincial Government Servants only. In the proviso to rule 6 of the Judicial Branch Rules, 1962, as well as in clause 7 (c) of Notification dated 16-5-1982 of the Commission care was taken to specify the persons who fall within the connotation of the word "Government Servant". These persons are those Government Servants who are serving in connection with the affairs of the Centre and are domiciled in Punjab or who have served in connection with the affairs of West Pakistan/Punjab for a period of not less than four years. The frame of the Rule is presumed to know the state of law prevailing and as such it cannot be urged with success that by use of the term "Government Servant" framer of the law intended to refer to the persons serving in connection with the affairs of the Government of Punjab only. If it was so intended, there was nothing in the way of the framer of the aforesaid clause to employ therein the very phrase used in clause (ii) of that very rule or to qualify the term "Government Servant" by using appropriate words. The expression "Government Servant" cannot be read as "Servant of the Government" so as to bring in the definition of the term "Govern--ment" given in the Act and thereby to limit it to the Provincial Govern--ment Servants. The expression "Government Servant" was used in its generic sense and is to be understood in its accepted connotation as this interpretation appears to be in consonance with reason and justice.
9. The net result of the above discussion is that the eligibility of the petitioners for admission to the Examination shall be determined by the Commission in the light of the observations made above and by treating the expression "Government Servant" used in rule 3 (v) of the Relaxation Rules as applying to the persons serving in connection with the affairs of the Federation as well. These petitions are accepted in the terms stated above.
There will be no order as to costs.