livelawpk.com - Re-Employment of Retired Employees must be Transparent

The Decision-Making Process for Re-Employment of Retired Employees must be Transparent and Justifiable under Judicial Review --- Islamabad High Court, Islamabad

5 months, 1 week
456

The Decision-Making Process for Re-Employment of Retired Employees must be Transparent and Justifiable under Judicial Review --- Islamabad High Court, Islamabad

Islamabad 10-07-2024: In a landmark decision, the Islamabad High Court has invalidated the re-employment of a retired cardiology professor at the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS), ruling that the appointment was made in violation of the Civil Servants Act, 1973, and blocked the promotion prospects of other qualified candidates.

The Court's decision came in response to a writ petition filed by Petitioner (Doctor), a serving Professor of Cardiology at PIMS, challenging the appointment of respondent No. 3 as Professor of Cardiology on a contract basis and as the Head of the Cardiology Department at PIMS. The respondent had retired on April 11, 2023, and was re-appointed on April 17, 2023, for a period of two years.

The petitioner argued that the re-employment of the retired professor violated Section 14 of the Civil Servants Act, 1973, which states that re-employment of retired government servants is permissible only when necessary in the public interest and with the approval of the appropriate authority. He contended that the appointment was made without the necessary approval from the President of Pakistan and that it blocked the promotion prospects of other professors at PIMS.

The Islamabad High Court, presided over by Mr. Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, reviewed the provisions of Section 14 and noted that it is couched in negative and prohibitory terms, indicating that re-employment should be an exception rather than a rule. The Court highlighted that no material evidence was presented to demonstrate the necessity of the re-employment or that it served the public interest.

In his decision, the Court cited the Supreme Court's interpretation in Suo Motu Case No.24/2010, which emphasized strict adherence to the relevant provisions of law to avoid blocking the promotion of other officers. The Court also referenced the Establishment Division's policy, which states that re-employment should be considered only in cases where the retiring person's experience is of vital importance and no suitable replacements are available.

The Court further noted that the Executive Director of PIMS had requested the withdrawal of the notification appointing respondent No. 3, indicating that it was issued without proper recommendations. The decision-making process for re-employment, the Court asserted, must be transparent and justifiable under judicial review.

Recognizing the petitioner’s legitimate expectation to be considered for the position of Head of the Cardiology Department, the Court ruled that respondent No. 3's appointment had usurped this right. The petition was allowed, and the impugned notification dated April 17, 2023, was set aside.

This ruling underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding the rule of law and ensuring fair consideration of promotion prospects for serving Civil Servants, setting a significant precedent for future cases involving re-employment after retirement.