Appointments on deputation: SC tells 136 officers to go back to their departments

Calls report about re-induction of 81 others under Sindh Civil Servants Act 2013.


Naeem Sahoutara April 08, 2013
Junior officers had complained that appointments through deputation deprive them of their legal right to promotions. PHOTO: EXPRESS/Rashid Ajmeri

KARACHI: The Supreme Court has given the provincial bureaucracy 24 hours to return 136 officers to their parent departments in the federal government. These officers were inducted and absorbed into the various provincial government departments.

“Send them back to their parent departments and submit a compliance report by tomorrow, otherwise you will have to expose yourselves to contempt of court proceedings,” said a two-member bench of the Supreme Court on Monday. The judges, Justice Sarmad Jalal Osmany and Justice Amir Hani Muslim, were hearing various petitions, applications and appeals on the controversial deputations that had irked junior officers. The aggrieved officers had complained that hiring junior officers from other departments and their subsequent absorption and promotions had deprived the juniors of their legal right to promotions. On February 6, the apex court two-member bench had referred the issue to a larger bench to hear and decide the cases, after the Sindh government legalised out-of-turn promotions by passing the Sindh Civil Servants (Amendment) Act, 2013.



On Monday, Advocate General Abdul Fattah Malik informed the judges that 136 officers were still working in different government departments on deputation. The judges questioned the Sindh chief secretary and the services secretary why they continued to induct officers on deputation by nullifying the court orders, under the garb of the civil servants’ amendment bill. The provincial government defended, however, these inductions and promotions.

Chief secretary Raja Muhammad Abbas and services secretary Naseer Jamali admitted, however, that around 46 out of the 136 officers were required to work in Sindh government departments. They told the judges that 81 officers were also inducted under the new service law. “The situation of civil service in Sindh is worse than any other province,” remarked Justice Muslim angrily. “If, we order the arrest of the officers, then everything would become right,” he said.



The bench also scolded the chief secretary for hiring back those who were ordered by the court to be repatriated to their parent departments, demanding whether these officers had become competent now that they could be rehired. According to Jamali, a total of 421 officers were repatriated to their parent departments earlier and 136 of them were called back. He also said the officers were called back on the orders of former chief minister Qaim Ali Shah.

A summary to repatriate the 136 officers was sent to the caretaker chief minister but they are waiting for his orders, he added. He proposed a committee be formed but the judges turned down his request. “We only want the apex court orders to be implemented in letter and spirit,” the judges insisted, declaring that they will not allow the civil service structure to be destroyed. The bench also came hard on the officers, who finally conceded that 136 officers were inducted. They also asked for a report on 81 officers, who were inducted under the garb of the new services act. The bench is expected to take up the out-of-turn promotions of police officers today (Tuesday).

Published in The Express Tribune, April 9th, 2013.

COMMENTS (1)

Rule of Law | 11 years ago | Reply

"The bench also scolded the chief secretary for hiring back those who were ordered by the court to be repatriated to their parent departments," This was expected from the PPP's appointed Chief Secretary to serve his political masters (PPP + MQM) and blatantly defying the Court Order. The incompetent bureaucracy of Sindh needs to be shuffled on the lines of Punjab to ensure neutrality..... Otherwise, agli bari phir zardari ;)

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ