Accrued Rights under a Repealed Rule are preserved and Legislative changes cannot have Retrospective Effect unless explicitly stated --- Lahore High Court, Lahore
Islamabad 07-12-2024: In a significant decision, Mr. Justice Asim Hafeez of the Lahore High Court’s Multan Bench ruled that the Punjab Public Service Commission’s (PPSC) retrospective application of the omission of Rule 17-A from the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment & Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974 was unlawful. The Court directed the PPSC to revisit the Petitioner’s case and apply Rule 17-A prospectively.
The Petitioner, Muhammad Zaman, had sought appointment under Rule 17-A, which provided additional recruitment marks for dependents of deceased or invalidated Civil Servants. Despite fulfilling the conditions for entitlement before Rule 17-A was omitted via a notification dated July 26, 2024, the PPSC denied him the benefit, citing the rule’s retrospective repeal.
The Petitioner contended that his claim accrued before the omission, and the retrospective interpretation of the repeal was unlawful.
The Court emphasized that the omission of Rule 17-A did not explicitly provide for retrospective effect. Therefore, rights accrued before the omission must be preserved. It cited prior judgments, including (W.P. No.13444/2024) (Syed Noor-ul-Hadi Shah Vs. Government of Punjab), which affirmed the impermissibility of retrospective application without clear legislative intent.
Referring to Section 4 of the Punjab General Clauses Act, 1956, the Court noted that rights accrued under a repealed rule are protected unless explicitly negated. The Petitioner’s entitlement to additional marks under Rule 17-A remained valid as the recruitment process commenced before its repeal.
The judgment clarified that the Court’s role was limited to ensuring proper legal interpretation and procedural fairness. The eligibility assessment for benefits under Rule 17-A falls within the PPSC’s domain.
The Court analyzed the Supreme Court of Pakistan recent ruling in (Civil Petition No.3390 of 2021) (General Post Office, Islamabad Vs. Muhammad Jalal, 2024 SCP 358). While the Supreme Court of Pakistan declared Rule 17-A appointments discriminatory, it did not invalidate the rule retroactively.
The Lahore High Court declared the PPSC’s interpretation of the rule as “misreading of the law” and directed the commission to revisit the Petitioner’s case by applying Rule 17-A prospectively and to consider the Petitioner’s entitlement to additional marks in accordance with conditions prescribed before the rule’s omission.
This judgment reinforces key legal principles:
- Legislative changes cannot have retrospective effect unless explicitly stated.
- Accrued rights under repealed provisions are protected.
Administrative authorities must adhere to procedural fairness in applying rules and regulations.
Powered by Froala Editor
