Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Miscelleneous Matter, Challenging the change of criteria and merit list for the post of Chairman, NADRA.

Summary: Petitioner seeks to set aside order dated 08.08.2020 passed by Learned ADJ West Islamabad

Summary: The dispute arose when the appellants initially advertised vacancies for Junior Engineers on a temporary/ad-hoc basis, but later issued a corrigendum changing the appointment terms from "contract basis" to "ad-hoc basis." The respondents were appointed on this basis, and their employment was extended on an ad-hoc basis. The respondents sought regularization, but their representation was dismissed by the competent authority. The Single Judge accepted their writ petition, setting aside the corrigendum and the dismissal order, and directed the consideration of the respondents' regularization. The appellants contested this decision through the Intra-Court Appeal.The court analyzed WAPDA's authority to frame procedures for employee appointments under the Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act, 1958. It referred to the Recruitment Policy, which outlined the recruitment process for Junior Engineers. The court found that the respondents were indeed appointed on an ad-hoc basis, as per the advertisement and the committee's decision based on the emergent needs of the department.However, the court noted that the recruitment process, conducted through walk-in interviews, was declared non-transparent and violative of competition rules by a previous judgment (GEPCO vs. Malik Waqas Ahmad and others, PLD 2013 Lahore 339). Legal precedents emphasized the importance of merit, transparency, and fairness in recruitment processes.Furthermore, the court referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Dr. Naveeda Tufail and others vs. Government of Punjab (2003 SCMR 291), which emphasized the requirement for ad-hoc employees to be assessed for regularization through appropriate channels.Ultimately, the court ruled in favor of WAPDA, overturning the Single Judge's order and dismissing the respondents' writ petition. The decision highlighted that ad-hoc employees cannot claim extension or regularization without adhering to the prescribed policy. Citing legal precedents such as Abu Bakar Farooq vs. Muhammad Ali Rajpar (2019 SCMR 830), the court emphasized that ad-hoc appointments should not be regularized beyond the specified period without proper procedures. The judgment reflects a commitment to transparency and meritocracy in the recruitment and regularization of employees within WAPDA.

Summary: Against reduction of penalty

Summary: Against reduction of penalty

Summary: Against reduction of penalty