Argues only four or five petitions actually challenged Central Selection Board decision on grounds of supersession PHOTO: IHC WEBSITE
The additional attorney general (AAG) argued before the Islamabad High Court on Tuesday that a number of petitions filed challenging promotions of civil servants were speculative. “The text of several of the 60-odd petitions is copy-pasted,” he quipped on a lighter note.
AAG Afnan Karim Kundi partially completed his arguments on Tuesday in the federal government’s appeals challenging the judgment of a single bench in multiple promotion cases filed by bureaucrats before the IHC.
The division bench comprises Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb.
In his arguments, the AAG said that apart from four to five petitions that actually challenged CSB’s decision on the grounds that they were superseded, others were speculative.
Kundi said the petitioners were fine with categorisation and overriding effect because they never challenged it.
He emphasised that deferment was not adverse as those who had been deferred were saved from being superseded.
He added that the officers were considered for promotion, and that the reasons for deferral were not recorded in all the forms.
“Can we assume this is your argument?” asked Justice Aurangzeb.
“Not really, but I’m just saying,” Kundi replied.
“The bench salutes you,” remarked Justice Aurangzeb, “and I mean it from the core of my heart.”
“All I can do is to take it as a compliment,” said Kundi.
“We intended the same,” the bench replied.
He replied in affirmative when the bench asked if the minutes of the CSB meeting were prepared.
As per the office memorandums issued in 2012 and 2014, Kundi said, a candidate would not be considered for promotion, regardless of falling in category A, B or C, if he could not get three out of five marks from the CSB.
Kundi said that the single bench gave “incorrect references” in its judgment, as both memos had different forms attached with them, but the bench only referred to the 2012 memo.
In a lighter moment, when Kundi was granted a water break, Justice Farooq suggested that the AAG have a candy bar to keep up his spirited arguments.
Following the water break, Kundi argued for a few more minutes, in which he also said he had presented the “factual arguments” on Tuesday, and would present the “actual arguments” in the next hearing.
The court later adjourned for the day.
Kundi will continue arguments on Wednesday (today).
Published in The Express Tribune, February 17th, 2016.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ