ISLAMABAD:
The Lahore High Court (LHC) set aside the executive orders of the Punjab government and ruled that women have the right to be appointed permanent woodcutters.
“This Court cannot remain aloof from the contemporary constitutional spirit of equality, inclusion and fair participation of women in public life. No provision of law disqualifying a woman from holding the office of Lumberdar has been shown,” states a seven-page order written by LHC judge Raheel Kamran, while allowing plea by a petitioner against the Lodhran deputy commissioner and Board of Revenue orders appointing another person as permanent lumberdar.
Previously, the petitioner’s father had worked as a permanent woodcutter in the same village until his death.
The order stated that when a female candidate meets the relevant criteria and demonstrates competence, experience and acceptability, her candidacy must receive the same objective consideration as that of any male candidate.
“Rural governance and revenue administration benefit when capable women are allowed to participate in institutional roles historically monopolized by men.
“Such participation promotes the constitutional values of equal opportunity and strengthens public confidence in impartial administration. Any latent bias, direct or indirect, that diminishes a woman’s candidacy for reasons unrelated to merit cannot be tolerated,” the order said.
The court noted that the petitioner was no stranger to the administration of the town.
“The record shows that she had been functioning as a Sarbarah Lumberdar since 2002 and had been assisting the deceased incumbent in the discharge of his official duties. Such a long association with the office is a relevant factor as appointment as a Lumberdar is not ceremonial; it requires familiarity with revenue processes, communication with officials, local knowledge and public accessibility. Her hereditary claim, her experience, her interest in the land and her position at the top of comparative merit after due procedures could not have been displaced except for compelling, objective and legally sustainable reasons, which do not exist in the present case,” the order states.
