Police officers walk past Pakistan’s Supreme Court building, in Islamabad, Pakistan, April 6, 2022. REUTERS
ISLAMABAD:
A key policy governing the transfers and postings of married officials will come under fresh judicial scrutiny, as the Supreme Court has decided that the scope and applicability of the marriage policy in service matters should be examined by a larger court.
A division bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi, while hearing an appeal filed by the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) against an order of the Federal Service Tribunal (FST), directed the court’s office to arrange the matter before a three-member bench for a final decision.
During the hearing of the case last month, the court noted that a recent decision of the SC had allowed a claim of retention at a particular station based on the Marriage Policy, sparking a wider debate on whether such relief could be considered enforceable in service law.
At this stage, Hafiz Ahsaan Ahmad Khokhar, representing the FBR, raised reservations with respect to the earlier judgment of Justice Ayesha Malik, arguing that the Marriage Policy could not be applied as a vested or absolute right by a public servant in derogation of the Public Servants Act, 1973, the Estacode and the instructions of the Establishment Division governing transfers and postings.
He further noted that in the present case, the officer had been posted in Peshawar for more than fifteen years, thereby putting the matter outside the scope and intent of the marriage policy, which, he said, was subject to administrative requirements and rotation principles.
The lawyer emphasized that the applicability of the policy must be strictly examined in the light of the existing service laws and administrative instructions. Following these arguments, the court referred the matter to a three-member tribunal for final decision.
The referral has sparked debate in legal circles, particularly over why the matter was sent to a larger court despite the existence of a two-member ruling on the Marriage Policy.
Legal experts suggest that the three-member court may take a different view from the liberal interpretation previously adopted by Justice Ayesha Malik regarding the scope and applicability of the policy.
In December last year, a division bench comprising Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Ayesha Malik had observed that the State must follow the Marriage Policy as it was designed to specifically address the difficulties faced by married government employees and unmarried female government employees.
In that ruling, the court held that the government could not selectively apply the policy, emphasizing that it must be followed in letter and spirit to eliminate difficulties and discourage the continued practice of issuing transfer orders without sensitivity to the requirements of married employees.
“Therefore, as a matter of decorum, an effort must be made to follow the Policy to avoid psychological, economic and social tensions on families,” the ruling reads.
The court said that the relevant constitutional provisions collectively impose on the State the burden of promoting the full participation of women in public service and protecting the institution of marriage and family for the benefit of both men and women.
