Naveed Afzal VS Pm Secretariat & others

ORDER SHEET

IN THE ISLAMABAD HIGH COURT, ISLAMABAD

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

W.P.No.745 of 2022 Naveed Afzaal Versus Prime Minister’s Secretariat and others S. No. of order Date of order/ Order with signature of Judge and that of parties or counsel / proceedings Proceedings where necessary. 15.03.2022 Mr. Shahid Mehmood Khokhar, Advocate for the petitioner.

C.M.No.945/2022 This is an application for placement of additional documents on the record. Allowed subject to all just and legal exceptions. C.M.No.946/2022 Exemption sought for is allowed subject to all just and legal exceptions.

MAIN CASE

Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner, Naveed Afzaal, impugns the office order dated 02.06.2021 issued by the Ministry of Overseas Pakistanis and Human Resource Development (“Ministry of O.P.&H.R.D.”) whereby the petitioner was recalled to Pakistan from the Embassy of Pakistan, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (“KSA”) where he was serving as Community Welfare Attaché (“C.W.A.”).

2.The record shows that the petitioner is a BS-18 officer of Defence Intelligence Services. He had participated in a competitive process for appointment as C.W.A. in Pakistan’s Diplomatic Missions Abroad. After the petitioner was selected for the said appointment, the Ministry of O.P.&H.R.D., vide letter dated 02.06.2020 appointed him as C.W.A. at the Embassy of Pakistan at Riyadh, KSA. The terms and conditions on which the petitioner was appointed showed that his tenure as C.W.A. was

to be for a non-extendable period of three years. On 10.11.2020, he assumed the charge of his duties as a C.W.A. at the Embassy of Pakistan at Riyadh, KSA. He was to have a diplomatic status of Second Secretary.

3.Vide office order dated 02.06.2021, the petitioner was recalled to Pakistan and directed to report to his parent department. Against the said order, the petitioner filed a representation on 12.08.2021 to the Secretary, Ministry of O.P.&H.R.D. Vide letter dated 26.08.2021, the said representation was turned down with the observation that the decision to recall the petitioner was consistent with clause 1(vi) of the offer letter dated 02.06.2020 issued by the said Ministry. In the said letter, it was clarified that the petitioner’s recall to the Pakistan shall not be construed as a penalty under the Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973.

4.The petitioner has assailed Ministry of O.P.&H.R.D.’s office order dated 02.06.2021 and letter dated 26.08.2021 in the instant writ petition.

5.Learned counsel for the petitioner, after narrating the facts leading to the filing of the instant petition, submitted that the petitioner had a vested right to serve as C.W.A. at the Embassy of Pakistan at Riyadh, KSA for a period of three years; that the petitioner could not have been prematurely recalled without a just cause; that the “Policy Guidelines for Foreign Appointments and Postings in Pakistan Missions Abroad and against Pakistan’s Seats in International, Multilateral, Bilateral and Regional Organizations, Fora and Bodies” contained in the Establishment Division’s Office

Memorandum dated 16.02.2016 did not contain any provision for the premature recall of an officer appointed for a fixed period in Pakistan’s Diplomatic Missions Abroad; and that the respondents have not specified any circumstance which warranted the petitioner’s recall to Pakistan.

6.Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that a fact-finding inquiry had been conducted by the Secretary to the Prime Minister after the Prime Minister had expressed his displeasure on the performance and behavior of the officers posted in Pakistan’s Embassy and Consulate in KSA; that the fact- finding inquiry report dated 28.04.2021 does not mention anything adverse about the petitioner; that the press release issued by the Prime Minister’s Inspection Commission shows that disciplinary proceedings were recommended to be taken against three officers, which did not include the petitioner; and that the petitioner’s premature recall to Pakistan is arbitrary and liable to be set-aside in the Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for the writ petition to be allowed in terms of the relief sought therein.

7.I have heard the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the record with his able assistance. The facts leading to the filing of the instant petition have been set out in sufficient detail in paragraphs 2 to 4 above, and need not be recapitulated.

8.Vide letter dated 02.06.2020, the Ministry of O.P.&H.R.D. had offered the petitioner the position of C.W.A. at the Embassy of Pakistan at Riyadh. The terms and conditions on which the said offer was made are clearly set out in the

said letter. Clauses (iv) and (vi) of the said terms are reproduced herein below:- “iv. You will be reverted to your parent department / group on completion of tenure or earlier as the case may be. vi. The Government reserves the right to modify or withdraw / cancel your appointment / posting letter, if the circumstances so warranted and in that case you will not claim any right for the said appointment / posting.”

9.The impugned office order dated 02.06.2021 shows that the petitioner and another officer who were serving as C.W.A. had been recalled to Pakistan. This shows that the petitioner has not been singled out.

10.The three-year period for which the petitioner was appointed as C.W.A. at the Embassy of Pakistan at Riyadh is not fixed by any statute or statutory rule. Therefore, the petitioner did not have a vested right to complete the tenure for which he was appointed as a C.W.A.

11.Since the petitioner had been accepted the terms and conditions on which he was appointed as a C.W.A., he is deemed to be fully aware of the authority of the Government to recall him to Pakistan prior to the completion of his tenure. This Court cannot rewrite the terms and conditions on which the petitioner was sent as a C.W.A. to the Embassy of Pakistan at Riyadh.

12.True, a fact-finding inquiry had conducted after the Prime Minister had expressed his displeasure on the performance and behavior of officers posted at the Pakistan’s Embassy and Consulate in KSA but the fact-finding inquiry report dated 28.04.2021 and the press release issued by the Prime Minister’s Inspection Commission do not have anything adverse

against the petitioner. Furthermore, in the Ministry of O.P.&H.R.D.’s letter dated 26.08.2021, it has been clarified that the petitioner’s recall is not to be treated as an imposition of a penalty on him. There is nothing on the record to show that the petitioner has been stigmatized by his recall to Pakistan.

13.In view of the above, I do not find any merit in this petition which is accordingly dismissed in limine.

(MIANGUL HASSAN AURANGZEB)

JUDGE

Sultan*