PESHAWAR: Two lawyers on Saturday petitioned the Peshawar High Court against a rule that exempts officers of the armed forces from sitting a competitive examination for civil service appointments.

The petition was jointly filed by advocates Ali Azim Afridi and Wiqar Ahmad Maidan with multiple prayers to the high court.

They requested that the court declare Rule 3 of the Civil Service of Pakistan (Composition and Cadre) Rules, 1954, in conflict with the Constitution for granting that test exemption to officers of the armed forces.

The petitioners said that if that prayer couldn’t be accepted, then legal practitioners should be “treated” like the officers of the armed forces for those civil service appointments.

Lawyers request court to declare Rule 3 of CSP rules in conflict with Constitution

The petitioners said Rule 3 declared: “Appointments to the Service [Pakistan Administrative Service] shall be made by the President on the basis of the results of an open competitive examination held by the Federal Public Service Commission, except in the case of officers of the Armed Forces, who may be appointed to the Service on the recommendation of the FPSC [Federal Public Service Commission], arrived at through an interview and a scrutiny of service records.”

They contended that the Civil Service of Pakistan (Composition and Cadre) Rules, 1954, guarded appointments to the civil service on the basis of the results of an open competitive examination held by the Federal Public Service Commission.

The petitioners, however, said that Rule 3, giving exception status to the officers of the armed forces, had taken over their “fundamentally guaranteed rights.”

“This classification is self-styled and is aimed at facilitating a few officers of the armed forces, carrying a diametrically opposite background and way of training. A way-out has been carved for them by keeping the constitutionally guaranteed contours meaningless,” read the petition.

The petitioners said that though that bifurcation or exception was not warranted, it was kept intact through those rules.

They questioned why the advocates had not been included in the service exception meant for the officers of the armed forces.

The petitioners contended that the act of ignoring advocates for that category was unconstitutional.

They said that it was the duty of the constitutional courts to ensure that the instruments impinging upon rights and dissimilar to the Constitution and the law were looked upon and attended to.

The respondents in the petition are the federation of Pakistan through the federal law secretary, secretary of the Establishment Division, the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government through its law secretary, the Federal Public Service Commission through its chairman, and principal secretaries to the president of Pakistan and KP governor.

Published in Dawn, May 26th, 2024

Opinion

Editorial

Elusive justice
Updated 04 Jul, 2024

Elusive justice

Till the Pakistani justice system institutionalises the fundamental principles of justice, it cannot fulfil its responsibilities.
High food prices
04 Jul, 2024

High food prices

THAT the country’s exports of raw food rose by 37pc in the last financial year over the previous one is a welcome...
Paralysis in academia
04 Jul, 2024

Paralysis in academia

LIKE all other sectors, higher education is not immune to the debilitating financial crisis that is currently ...
Orwellian state
Updated 03 Jul, 2024

Orwellian state

Implementing a system to spy on one’s own people is a perverse abuse of power and should be stopped forthwith.
Coping with disaster
03 Jul, 2024

Coping with disaster

THE monsoons are practically upon us, bringing with them the fear of urban flooding, flash floods, and accompanying...
Jail security
Updated 03 Jul, 2024

Jail security

If those convicted of murder, rape or terrorism are able to break free, it will not reflect well on the competence of our criminal justice system.