PESHAWAR: Peshawar High Court on Thursday issued notices to federal law and establishment secretaries and Federal Public Service Commission (FPSC), seeking their response to a petition against a rule that exempts officers of armed forces from sitting a competitive examination for civil service appointments.

A bench consisting of Justice Syed Mohammad Attique Shah and Justice Shakil Ahmad issued the order after preliminary hearing of the petition jointly filed by advocates Ali Azim Afridi and Wiqar Ahmad Maidani with multiple prayers to the court.

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

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

Petitioners want lawyers treated like officers of armed forces for these appointments

Advocate Ali Azim said that Rule 3 declared: “Appointments to Service (Pakistan Administrative Service) shall be made by the President on the basis of the results of an open competitive examination held by Federal Public Service Commission, except in the case of officers of armed forces, who may be appointed to service on the recommendation of Federal Public Service Commission, arrived at through an interview and a scrutiny of service records.”

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

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

“This classification is self-styled and is aimed at facilitating a few officers of 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,“ he said.

Mr Azim stated that though the bifurcation or exception was not warranted, it was kept intact through those rules. He questioned as to why advocates had not been included in the service exception meant for the officers of armed forces.

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

He said that it was the duty of constitutional courts to ensure that the instruments impinging upon rights and dissimilar to 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 Establishment Division, the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government through its law secretary, Federal Public Service Commission through its chairman, and principal secretaries to President of Pakistan and governor of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

Published in Dawn, June 28th, 2024