Find a Lawyer

RASHEED AHMAD versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN

ections Sections 6 (2), 7 and 10 Pakistan Chairman of the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (EM PEMRA) - - Disclosure of personal interest in appointment of Chairman, PEMRA to a public servant employed by a mismanagement - The Appellant recommended to appoint himself as PEMRA as the Secretary of Information and Broadcasting, the summary which was prepared for this purpose, he suggested three names and gave him credibility. But the author (appellant) did not specifically disclose his personal interest when the appellant chairman Emira had proposed his name for the post, and did not get him, like he was appointed as a violation of a rule, which after prior written permission. Before applying - the appellant committed misconduct because he violated Section 10 of the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance 2002 (\\\ t he ordinance \\\) to take over as the chairman of PEMRA. Continuing work in public employment - Appellant claimed that he had relinquished the charge of government before taking charge of Pimra's office, though his discharge from office did not end with his appointment to public employment. - Appellant's appointment, too, was a violation of SI No. 140 of Volume 1 of the East Code, listed in: The procedure for appointment of autonomous / semi-autonomous bodies under Komut prescribed Ordinance Section 6 (2) determines the competence of the Chairman, PEMRA, which is integrity media, business, administration, finance, economics or law. I

P L D 2017 Supreme Court 121

Present: Dost Muhammad Khan, Qazi Faez Isa and Faisal Arab, JJ

RASHEED AHMAD—-Appellant

versus

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of InfÓrm;ation, Broadcasting and National Heritage, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad and others—Respondents

Civil Appeal No. 1216 of 2015, decided on 3rd February, 2017.

(On appeal against the judgment dated 6-10-2015 passed by the Islamabad High Court, Islamabad, in I.C.A. No.267 of 2015)

(a) Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance (XIII of 2002)—

—Ss. 6(2), 7 & 10—Chairman of Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority ("PEMRA ”), dismissal of—Misconduct—Serving Government servant appointed as Chairman, PEMRA—Non-disclosure of personal interest—Appellant in his position as Secretary to the Ministry of InfÓrm;ation and Broadcasting recommended himself to be appointed to the position of Chairman, PEMRA—Summary which the appellant prepared for such purpose attempted to give it a veneer of credibility by proposing three names, however, its author (the appellant) did not specifically disclose his personal interest—Appellant was in Government service when he proposed his name for the post of Chairman PEMRA, and subsequently when he was appointed to such post, he violated another rule, which was not having obtained the prior written permission before applying—Appellant, therefore, committed misconduct as he had violated S.10 of the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance, 2002 ("the Ordinance") by continuing in Government service whilst holding the position of Chairman, PEMRA—Appellant claimed that he had relinquished charge of the Government before assuming the charge of the post of Chairman* PEMRA, however relinquishment of charge did not sever the appellant from Government service—Appellant's appointment was , also fn violation of SI. No. 140 of Vol. 1 of the Esta Code which prescribed the, "Procedure Regarding Appointments in Autonomous/Semi-Autonomous Bodies, under the Federal Government"—Section 6(2) of the Ordinance set out the qualifications of Chairman, PEMRA who, "shall be an eminent professional of known integrity and competence having substantial experience in media, business, management, finance, economics or law"—Appellant could not be categorized as "an....

Badsgag Gul Wazir v. government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 2015 SCMR 43 Secretary to Government of N.W.RP. - Sadullah Khan 1996 SCMR 413, Collector of Customs and Central Excise v. Government of N.W.F.P. 2005 SCMR 85 distinguished.

(b) Constitution of Pakistan—

—Arts. 100 & 140—Attorney-General for Pakistan (Terms and Conditions) Rules, 2O11, R. 4—Central Law Officers Ordinance of 1970), S.2(l)—Additional Attorney-General, Deputy Attorney General and Standing Counsel Rules, 2011, R. 4(1) rac 1 Federal/Provincial Government departments of engaging Private counsel—Supreme Court deprecated such practice by observing that Federal Government and the Provincial Governments had a host 0f officers who were paid out of the public exchequer; that if government contends that none amongst its law officers were capable handling cases then the question would arise why had incompetent persons been appointed; that in such a scenario the public suffered twice, firstly, they had to pay for incompetent law officers, secondly, they had to pay again for the services of competent counsel the government engaged; that the public exchequer could not be squandered in such manner, and the State must protect its belongings and assets and those of citizens from waste and malversation; that the Constitution the Rules of Business, the Attorney-General for Pakistan (Terms and Conditions) Rules, 2011, the Central Law Officers Ordinance, 1970 and the Additional Attorney-General who did so on behalf of the governemnt disciplinary action in accordance with the applicable law-- appeal was dissmissed accordingly. [pp. 130, 132, 133] E, F & G

Muhammad Yasin v. 2015 SCMR 810; Mahmood Akhtar Naqvi v. Registrar of Trade Unions 1997

Waseem Sajjad, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Ahmed

Advocate-on-Record (absent) for pp

Sohail Mehmood, D.A.G and Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, Sohail Mehmood, D.A.O. Syed

Advocate-on-Record for Respondents Nos. an

Hafiz S.A. Rehman, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Mehmood Ahmed Sheikh, Advocate-on-Record fo P

Nemo for Respondents Nos. 2 and 6.

Date of hearing: 23rd January, 2017.

registration advocate from Neelam lawyer