Plea against direct appointment of armed forces officers in civil service dismissed

PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court (PHC) on Saturday dismissed a writ petition challenging the direct appointment of security officers in the Civil Service of Pakistan without a test.

The court ruled that since this was a government policy and Parliament has formulated laws on the matter, under which army officers were inducted into the Civil Services of Pakistan through a 10 percent quota.

A two-member bench comprising Justice Naeem Anwar and Justice Farah Jamshed heard the petition, in which the petitioner, Advocate Ali Azeem Afridi, challenged Rule 3 of the Civil Service of Pakistan Rules, 1954.

The petitioner argued that this rule granted an exemption to army officers, allowing them to be recruited into the civil service without taking a test. The petition requested that either the same exemption be extended to lawyers and ordinary citizens or the rules be declared illegal and nullified.

The petitioner contended that induction into the civil service was conducted through the Public Service Commission, which involved a written test and an interview, after which the Public Service Commission recommended successful candidates for recruitment.

While security forces officers, the lawyer pleaded, also joined the civil service solely based on an interview. Despite having a different background and training, security forces personnel are granted a pathway into the civil service. The classification within the civil service was claimed to be a violation of fundamental rights.

During the hearing, Additional Attorney General Sanaullah appeared on behalf of the federal government and argued that the law was originally enacted in 1934 and has undergone changes over time.

He explained that 10 percent of the total seats in the civil services were allocated for officers from the Army, Air Force, and Navy. Under this quota, he said officers were appointed to various positions in the Pakistan Administrative Service, Foreign Service, and Police Service of Pakistan (PSP).

AAG Sanaullah argued that only the best officers from the army were selected for civil service appointments and that before joining the army, these officers undergo selection through the Inter-Services Selection Board (ISSB).

He emphasized that the recruitment of army officers into the civil service falls under the jurisdiction of the Federal Public Service Commission and was conducted in accordance with the law.

After arguments, the court observed that the petitioner was a lawyer and had not personally suffered any harm, nor had he been directly affected by the matter.

The court ruled that lawmaking was the prerogative of Parliament, and the judiciary cannot interfere in policy-making or legislation unless it contravened the Constitution or fundamental rights.

Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition and ruled that a detailed verdict would be issued later.