IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
Present: 
 
Mr. Justice Amir Hani Muslim 
Mr. Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan 
Mr. Justice Mushir Alam 
 
 
Civil Petition No.80-Q of 2010  
Against 
the 
judgment 
dated 
14.4.2010 passed by the Baluchistan 
Service Tribunal Quetta in S.A No. 21 
of 2006  
Amanulah  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Petitioner(s) 
VERSUS 
 
Government of Baluchistan & 02 others  
 
 
Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s):  
 
Mr. M. Munir Paracha, ASC 
For Respondents No.1-2: 
Mr. Shaiq Baluch, AAG Baluchistan  
For Respondent No.3: 
Mr. Hassan Raza Pasha, ASC 
Date of Hearing: 
 
 
25.4.2014 
 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
 
 Mushir Alam, J.-   Instant Civil Petition for leave to Appeal 
under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 arises out of an order 
dated 14.4.2010 passed by the Baluchistan Service Tribunal, Quetta. 
2. 
 
Brief facts as may be necessary to appreciate the rival 
contentions of the parties appear to be that the Respondent No.3 Adam 
Khan was appointed as Risaldar in Levies on 23.12.1993. Appellant, Amanullah 
was appointed as Jamadar/Naib Risaldar in Levis on 18.12.1993. From the 
record it seems that Amanullah was favoured with out of turn promotion as 
Risaldar on 3.6.1999, which action was successfully challenged in Appeal by 
one Adil Muhammad who was senior to him consequently, Appellant was 
reverted to his original post as Naib Risaldar and said Adil Muhammad was 
promoted vide order in appeal dated 12.5.2003. Record show that the then 
Chief Minister of Balochistan on 9.8.2005 favoured Amanullah, with two stage 
out of turn promotion to Risaldar Major (B-14), overlooking ban and non 
availability of vacancy, beside ignoring seniority criteria as laid down in 
Section 9 of the Balochistan Civil Servants Act, 1974 and also by waiving 
Civil Petition No.80-Q of 2010  
 
2 
condition of consideration and recommendation of his case by the District 
Promotion Committee as required under Rule 7 of the Balochistan Civil Service 
(Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rule 1979, in negation of Balochistan 
Levies (B-1 to B-15) Rules 1990, consequently promotion order dated 
25.11.2005 was issued  by the Government of Balochistan, the Respondent 
No.1 herein.  
3. 
 
The 
Respondent 
No.3 
herein 
Adam 
Khan 
successfully 
challenged the above Order dated 25.11.2005 of the Respondent No.1 before 
the Balochistan Services Tribunal, Quetta. Learned Balochistan Services 
Tribunal, Quetta, in consideration of provisions contained in the Balochistan 
Civil Servants Act, 1974, Balochistan Civil Servants (Appointments, Promotion 
and Transfer) Rules, 1979, Balochistan Levies (B-1 to B-15) Rules 1990, and all 
other relevant laws/policy as in vogue allowed the appeal through impugned 
order dated 14.4.2010, relevant part of the impugned order is as follows:-   
“15. In the instant case, a deviation was made from the 
rules and the selection was made by the Chief Minister 
which was arbitrary and without lawful basis. In this regard 
we are fortified by the Judgment reported in SCMR 1995 
P-650, the relevant portion whereof is reproduced here-in-
below: 
“No doubt the competent authority has the 
discretion but it was not unfettered, while exercising 
discretion, the authority should not act arbitrarily, 
unreasonable and in complete disregard of the 
rules and regulations. The discretion to be exercised 
has to 
be judged 
and 
considered in the 
background of the facts and circumstances of 
each case. In the present case there is a strong 
background of ignoring for disapproving the 
appellant with certain proposes.” 
16.  In view of the above discussion, we are of considered 
view that the appellant has been granted two steps out of 
turn promotion illegally for erroneous consideration. We 
regretfully disapprove such exercise of power by the then 
Chief Minister of the province. The impugned order dated 
25.11.2005 is hereby set-aside being illegal and contrary to 
law. The respondent is reverted from the rank of Risaldar 
Major to the rank of Risaldar immediately. The respondent 
No.1 i.e. Secretary Home and Tribal Affairs is directed to 
place the case of appellant’s promotion as Risaldar Major 
before the District Promotion Committee being senior most 
within a period of two months”.  
4. 
 
Mr. Muhammad Munir Paracha, learned ASC for the petitioner, 
contended that the Petitioner was condemned unheard by the Balochistan 
Service Tribunal, as the Appellant was not served any notice of Appeal, 
therefore impugned order is liable to be set-aside and the service appeal be 
remanded for decision afresh after hearing the Appellant. When attention of 
learned ASC was drawn to the order of the Balochistan Service Tribunal dated 
5.06.2008, recording service of notice on the Appellant (page 71 of the Paper 
Book) and with copy of Notice of Service Appeal showing same address of 
Civil Petition No.80-Q of 2010  
 
3 
the Appellant as shown in the memo of Appeal, it was vainly argued that 
postman was not examined to prove service. We are afraid such contentions 
cannot be considered, sanctity is attached to the order of the Service Tribunal 
holding service good on the Appellant under given facts and circumstances 
no exception could be taken on this count. 
5. 
 
It was next contended that in terms of Section 20 of the General 
Clauses Act 1956 read with other enabling provision of Section 39 (1) of the 
Government of Balochistan Rules of Business read with Schedule VII and 
Section 23 of the Balochistan Civil Service Act, 1974, the Chief Minister being 
the executive head of the Province, had all the authority and discretion to 
relax the Rules, and no exception to exercise of such authority could be 
taken. Arguments seemingly persuasive, when examined, is denude of any 
legal sanctity on more than one counts; firstly in terms of Article 240 read with 
Article 260 and 2A of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973; terms and conditions 
of service of a person in the service of Pakistan  and or Province right from 
very inception of appointment till its termination or retirement including all 
matters incidental and or falling in between are determined by or under the 
Act of Parliament or Provincial Assembly, as the case may be.  Right to be 
consider for promotion of an employee is one of the essential term and 
condition of service. Secondly, section 23 of the Balochistan Civil Servant Act, 
1974 does not confer any power on the Government of Balochistan, which 
could be exercised through the executive authority of the Province, to relax 
any rules framed under the Act, 1974 governing promotion of a Civil Servant. 
Even otherwise, Section 23 of the Balochistan Civil Servant Act, 1974 only 
empowers the Government of Balochistan to, deal with the case of any civil 
servant in such manner as may appear to it to be just and proper. Even than 
such discretion is not unfettered but is shackled and controlled by the Proviso 
to section 23 ibid; which inter-alia provides that “where this Act or any rules is 
applicable to the case of a civil servant, the case shall not be dealt with in 
any manner less favourable to him than that provided by the Act or such 
rule.” Now examining the case in hand, appellant is in the service of Province 
of Balochistan. His terms and conditions of service are governed by special 
enactment namely Balochistan Civil Servant Act, 1974 and Balochistan Levies 
(B-1 to B-15) Rules, 1990. His promotion is regulated and controlled by 
Balochistan Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1979. 
In the matter of terms and conditions of services, Rule 7 thereof, mandates 
that promotion and transfer to the post in basic pay scale 2 to 16 and 
equivalent are to be made on the recommendation of the appropriate 
Departmental Promotion Committee and any promotion to higher grade is to 
be made on the recommendation of Provincial Selection Board.  Section 9 of 
Civil Petition No.80-Q of 2010  
 
4 
the Balochistan Civil Servants Act, 1974 mandates promotion against non-
selection post on the basis of seniority cum fitness. In instant case it is quite 
disturbing to note that the then Chief Minister, not only ordered out of turn 
promotion of the Appellant on purported meritorious service, but also waived 
off requirement of provisions of Rules 1979, bypassing District Promotion 
Committee.  The act of extending favour and conferring benefit of promotion 
is not only against the fundamental rights of promotion of his peers on merits 
but, is also a glaring example of nepotism and undue favour, which act is also 
opposed to Oath of office of the Chief Minister, whereby he pledged to the 
people of his province to “discharge my duties, and perform my function, 
honestly, to the best of my ability, faithfully in accordance with the 
Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the law, and always in the 
interest of the sovereignty, integrity solidarity, well being and prosperity of 
Pakistan….” That in all, circumstances, I will do right to all manner of people, 
according to law, without favour, affection or ill-will” thus favouring the 
Petitioner with out of turn promotion as Risaldar by passing all those in 
deserving and waiting for promotion is against all cannon of norms and law, 
and in abdication of Oath of office thus cannot be sustained. 
6. 
 
In a very recent case reported as Abdul Malik and others vs. 
Government of Balochistan through Secretary, Home and Tribal Department 
and others (2013 PLC (C.S.) 736), learned Division Bench of Balochistan High 
Court disapproved, for valid reasons, ad-hoc appointment of Risladars in the 
Provincial Levies Force on the directive of the Chief Minister. In the cited case, 
the High Court thoroughly examined the authority of the Provincial 
Government to relax rules. It was held therein Provincial Legislature had not 
granted the Provincial Government any power to ‘relax’ any rule.  No 
provision existed in the Balochistan Civil Servants (Appointments, Promotion 
and Transfer) Rules, 2009, which may enable the Provincial Government to do 
any thing in the purported ‘Relaxation of Rules.’ It was further held that if 
persons were appointed as Levies Officers on the personal whims of a Minister 
or on the basis of ‘sifarish’ the fundamental rights of those aspiring to such post 
were transgressed (Article 18), to be considered equal before the law (Article 
25(2) of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973. The Court not only set aside the ad-
hoc appointment of the Risaldar, declaring the same to be void-ab-initio but 
also directed them to refund all salaries and benefit received by them. In 
number of cases including Abdul Shakoor and others vs. Azad Government of 
the State of Jammu and Kashmir through Chief Secretary and others (2004 
PLC (C.S.) 208), and in the case of Muhammad Sadiq and another vs. Federal 
Service Tribunal, Islamabad and others (2003 PLC (C.S.) 1029), this Court 
Civil Petition No.80-Q of 2010  
 
5 
disapproved practice of relaxing Rules by the executive authority to extend 
favour to dole out favour to blue eyed. 
7. 
 
Under facts and circumstances of case, no exception to the well 
considered and reasoned decision dated 12.4.2010 of the Balochistan Service 
Tribunal could be taken. Leave is declined and petition is dismissed.  
  
    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
  Judge 
 
 
   Judge 
 
ISLAMABAD, THE  
25th April, 2014 
arshed 
Approved for Reporting 
Civil Petition No.80-Q of 2010  
 
6