Safia Bano hashmi VS Government of Pakistan etc

ORDER SHEET

IN THE ISLAMABAD HIGH COURT, ISLAMABAD

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

I.C.A.No.312 of 2014 Safia Bano Hashmi Versus Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Information and another S. No. of order Date of order/ Order with signature of Judge and that of parties or counsel / proceedings Proceedings where necessary. 12.06.2022 Mr. Muhammad Ramzan Khan, Advocate for the appellant.

M/s Shahida Parveen Sukhera and Uzma Aslam Mughal, Advocates for respondent No.2 / P.B.C.

Through the instant appeal the appellant, Safia Bano Hashmi, impugns the judgment dated 05.05.2014 passed by the learned Judge-in- Chambers whereby writ petition No.4681/2010 filed by her was dismissed. Through the said writ petition, the appellant had impugned the order dated 23.02.2010 issued by respondent No.2 / Pakistan Broadcasting Corporation (“P.B.C.”) whereby her services were terminated on the ground that her matriculation certificate issued by the Balochistan Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Quetta (“Balochistan B.I.S.E.”) had been found to be forged. Furthermore, it was ordered that an amount of Rs.65,797/- paid to her as salary and emoluments between 10.08.2009 to 31.01.2010 be recovered from her.

2.The record shows that vide letter dated 24.08.2009, P.B.C. offered the appellant appointment to the post of Assistant Programme Producer on the terms and conditions mentioned in the said letter. Paragraph XI of the said letter provides that the offer was subject to clearance of the appellant’s character and antecedents from the concerned agencies. In the process of verification of the appellant’s educational testimonials, the Balochistan B.I.S.E., vide letter

dated 19.01.2010, informed P.B.C. that her matriculation certificate had been found to be bogus. It is on the basis of the said letter that the impugned order dated 23.02.2010 was issued. The said order dated 23.02.2010 was assailed by the appellant in writ petition No.4681/2010 which was dismissed by the learned Judge-in-Chambers vide judgment dated 05.05.2014. The said judgment dated 05.05.2014 has been assailed by the appellant in the instant intra Court appeal.

3.Learned counsel for the appellant, after narrating the facts leading to the filing of the instant appeal, submitted that although the appellant’s matriculation certificate had been declared bogus by the Balochistan B.I.S.E. but the appellant had done her Bachelors and Masters from the University of Balochistan, Quetta and certificates in this regard were issued on 11.06.1987 and 18.03.1991, respectively; that the authenticity of the said certificates have never been questioned; that the appellant had lost her matriculation certificate and after issuing a publication to this effect, a duplicate certificate was issued by the Balochistan B.I.S.E. on 29.09.2010 which shows her date of birth to be 01.01.1962; that at no material stage was any show cause notice issued to the appellant and she was not afforded an opportunity of a hearing before the issuance of the order dated 23.02.2010; that the discrepancy in the appellant’s date of birth in her national identity card and the matriculation certificate is immaterial in deciding the controversy whether her matriculation certificate was genuine or not. Learned counsel for the appellant prayed for the appeal to be allowed and for the impugned judgment dated 05.05.2014 to be set-aside.

4.On the other hand, learned counsel for P.B.C. submitted that the appellant’s identity card filed along with the writ petition shows her date of birth as 01.01.1976; that this identity card was issued on 02.07.2005; that after the passing of the impugned order dated 23.02.2010, the appellant had another identity card issued on 02.12.2011 which shows her date of birth as 01.01.1962; that the appellant managed to have another identity card issued just so that it shows her date of birth as 01.01.1962 which is the date of birth mentioned in the duplicate matriculation certificate issued on 29.09.2010; and that the appellant had not challenged the letter dated 19.01.2010 from the Balochistan B.I.S.E. according to which her matriculation certificate bearing Roll No.4632 was declared as bogus. Learned counsel for P.B.C. prayed for the appeal to be dismissed.

5.We have heard the contentions of the learned counsel for the contesting parties and have perused the record with their able assistance. The facts leading to the filing of the instant appeal have been set out in sufficient detail in paragraph 2 above and need not be recapitulated.

6.After the appellant was appointed as Assistant Programme Producer by P.B.C. through letter dated 24.08.2009, a process for the verification of her matriculation certificate was initiated by P.B.C. P.B.C. had addressed letter dated 12.01.2010 to the Balochistan B.I.S.E. to verify the appellant’s matriculation certificate bearing Roll No.4632. A copy of this certificate was annexed with the written comments filed by P.B.C. This certificate was issued on 20.04.1989 and shows the appellant’s date of birth to be 01.01.1976. It also shows that the appellant had

sat in the annual examination conducted by Balochistan B.I.S.E. in 1988. Vide letter dated 19.01.2010, Balochistan B.I.S.E. informed P.B.C. that the said certificate was bogus.

7.If the said certificate is to be held as genuine, it would be a reductio ad absurdum (reduction to absurdity) as it would imply that the appellant had done her matriculation at the age of twelve.

8.In order to overcome a declaration by the Balochistan B.I.S.E. as to the appellant’s matriculation certificate being bogus, the appellant managed to obtain a duplicate matriculation certificate issued by the Balochistan B.I.S.E. on 29.09.2010 showing her date of birth 01.01.1962. The said certificate also bears Roll No.4632. Since the said duplicate matriculation certificate was issued after the appellant had been appointed as Assistant Programme Producer in P.B.C. through letter dated 24.08.2009, it was obviously not on the basis of the said duplicate matriculation certificate that she had been appointed.

9.It appears that the appellant had the duplicate matriculation certificate issued so that it would bear her date of birth as 01.01.1962 instead of 01.01.1976. Another reason why we feel that the appellant’s contention that her correct date of birth is 01.01.1962 is not believable is that along with her writ petition, she filed her identity card issued on 02.07.2005 which shows her date of birth as 01.01.1976. In order to overcome this hurdle, the appellant had another identity card issued to her on 02.12.2011 which shows her date of birth as 01.01.1962. We are of the view that the duplicate matriculation certificate and the new identity card were obtained by the appellant after

she was granted employment by P.B.C. only so as to save her from the adverse consequences of her originally issued matriculation certificate dated 20.04.1989 having been declared as bogus. At no material stage has the appellant challenged the Balochistan B.I.S.E.’s letter dated 19.01.2010 declaring her matriculation certificate to be bogus.

10.In view of the above, we do not find any merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed with costs throughout.

(ARBAB MUHAMMAD TAHIR) (MIANGUL HASSAN AURANGZEB)

JUDGE JUDGE

Sultan*