Appointment Revoked without Notice, due to an Administrative Error; Employee could not be penalized for Administrative Errors beyond his Control --- Supreme Court of Pakistan uphold the Tribunal’s decision to reinstate the Employee
Islamabad 16-12-2024: In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of Pakistan dismissed two Civil Petitions [C.Ps. No.187-Q] and [188-Q of 2024] filed by the Government of Balochistan, upholding the Balochistan Service Tribunal’s decision to reinstate a Junior Clerk whose appointment had been unjustly revoked. The Court’s ruling reaffirmed the principles of natural justice, administrative accountability, and protection of fundamental rights under the Constitution.
The case centered on Muhammad Yasir, who was appointed as a Junior Clerk (BPS-11) after successfully passing the test and interview conducted by the Energy Department, Government of Balochistan. However, his appointment was later revoked without notice, allegedly due to an administrative error in advertising two posts when only one was sanctioned.
Aggrieved by this decision, Yasir approached the Balochistan Service Tribunal, which reinstated him and directed an inquiry to determine his entitlement to back pay. The Government of Balochistan challenged this ruling in the Supreme Court of Pakistan.
The Court held that the withdrawal of Yasir’s appointment without notice violated Article 10-A (right to a fair trial) and Article 4 (right to be treated in accordance with the law) of the Constitution.
The judgment criticized the department for its procedural lapses for Advertising two posts when only one was sanctioned and failing to take internal disciplinary action against responsible officials. The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to principles of natural justice, ruling that Yasir could not be penalized for administrative errors beyond his control.
Referring to the Balochistan Service Tribunals (Amendment) Act, 2021, the Court underscored that review jurisdiction is confined to correcting errors apparent on the record and cannot serve as an opportunity for rehearing.
The Court highlighted the State’s duty under Article 3 of the Constitution to prevent exploitation, stating that depriving Yasir of his lawful employment due to departmental inefficiencies amounted to administrative exploitation.
The Supreme Court of Pakistan criticized the department for its lack of coordination and failure to rectify its own errors, stating:
- “The respondent, who was appointed on merit, was made a scapegoat and condemned unheard due to administrative inefficiencies. Such actions contravene the basic tenets of good governance and natural justice.”
Dismissing the petitions, the Supreme Court of Pakistan upheld the Tribunal’s decision to reinstate Yasir with back benefits contingent on the inquiry. The Court refused leave to appeal, affirming that the department’s actions were illegal and unjust.
Powered by Froala Editor
