Former majors Burhan, Tariq, Shabbir besides Aliya Rasheed not eligible for posts; apex court forms body to determine qualification of 102 officers
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Wednesday ordered removal of three military officials and a civilian inducted into the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) with inherent disqualification.
A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Ameer Hani Muslim, heard the suo moto case regarding alleged illegalities, contraventions and violations in appointment within the anti-graft body.
The court directed removal of Lahore NAB DG Major (retd) Burhan Ali, Karachi NAB DG Major (retd) Shabbir Ahmed and Balochistan NAB DG Major (retd) Tariq Mehmood Dawar and Aliya Rashid, a sportswoman and NAB DG Awareness and Prevention.
“Those officers who did not qualify the initial appointment need to be de-notified immediately; however, they are entitled to pensionery benefits and perks,” the court ruled in its order after hearing all the parties in the matter.
The court further ruled that these officials could apply for the posts against the advertisement but they would be reconsidered for the posts on merit and in accordance with law and as per required qualification.These four officers had refused to opt for premature retirement and opted for contesting the case.
NAB Chairman Qamar Zaman Chaudhry the other day informed the court that the three military officials inducted into the Bureau had refused to get premature retirement and opted for contesting the case.
Likewise, he told the court that he was thinking about Aliya Rashid and on Wednesday, he termed Aliya Rashid a very valuable officer but admitted that she was appointed illegally.Aliya Rashid, who was present in the courtroom, burst into tears and tried her best to convince the court about eligibility for her appointment for the post of NAB DG Awareness and Prevention as well as giving facts to the court what she said were missed by her counsel. However, the court told her that it had already heard her counsel.
“Please, listen to me for five minutes as I want to give the facts to the court,” Aliya Rashid said with tears. “We are not travelling to facts,” Justice Amir Hani Muslim told the lady saying she was not qualified for the post. Her counsel told the court that she was appointed under the prime minister’s policy and not under rules adding that she had never been in investigation but headed the Awareness and Prevention department. But she was appointed against a regular post, the court observed.
When Aliya Rashid said that the anti-graft body was looking for a soft face and hence she was appointed, Justice Qazi Faez Isa, another member of the bench, observed that the anti-graft body should have a scary face.
Her counsel, Hafiz S A Rehman, had told the court that she was appointed by former prime minister Mir Zafrullah Khan Jamali in recognition of her services in international sports. The court, however, had observed that she could be appointed as DG Sports, secretary could be appointed as DG Sports, Secretary Sports or elsewhere but not in NAB which deals with investigation.
The court directed NAB chairman to de-notify these officials adding that appointments against the now-vacant posts could be made through the Federal Public Services Commission (FPSC). Similarly, the court asked NAB chairman to fill in those posts on temporary basis until new appointments were made.
The court ordered that a committee should be formed to look into the promotions and appointments of officers. The committee would comprise of Establishment Division Secretary Tahir Shahbaz, NAB DG HR Muhammad Shakil Malik and a member from Federal Public Service Commission.
The court directed FPSC chairman to notify its member for the said committee within a week. The court ruled in its order that the committee would deal with the reported illegal appointments of 95 officers besides looking into the appointments of 102 officers, who were selected after being promoted.
The court directed that the said committee would submit its findings about these officials and submit its recommendations within a period of two months. The court ruled that as per findings of the report, submitted by Establishment Division secretary, he found 137 officers whose promotions were inconsistence with the Rules of NAB and out of it 35 got retired.
The court ruled in its order that the remaining 102 officers who are still in service would be served show cause notices for appearing before the said committee which would decide their matters within two months.
The court in its order noted that Establishment Division secretary had pointed out five other officers including Muhammad Wahab, Yasir Mahmood, Karim Buksh, Haroon Bhatti and Adnan Shehzad Khan who were not eligible to be appointed against the posts and were either asked to seek retirement or face termination from their service.
Counsel for Adnan Shehzad Khan however, submitted before the court that he should be repatriated to his parent department -- National Bank of Pakistan (NBP). The court then directed NAB chairman to relieve him and repatriate to NBP and ask president of the bank to allow him to join the bank with all entitled benefits.
The counsel further said that the remaining four officers if failed to get equivalence certificates from the Higher Education Commission (HEC), their services be terminated.
Meanwhile, the court rejected the plea of one, Abdur Rehman, counsel for some 8 officers relating to experience in the initial appointments saying that he had no confidence over Establishment Division secretary for dealing with the matters.
Establishment Division Secretary Tahir Shahbaz however, told the court that he should not be considered as member for the said committee. Justice Ameer Hani Muslim however, told the Establishment Division secretary that he would be assigned the task to deal with the matter. The court while addressing advocate Abdur Rehman observed that on its direction, Establishment Division secretary had filed a report after much hard work.
It is pertinent to mention here that Establishment Division secretary had submitted a report before the apex court stating that from 2003 to 2015, a total of 629 appointments on regular basis were made in BPS-16 to BPS-21, however, inconsistencies were observed in 101 cases. Out of these 101 cases, 76 were those where the candidates had not acquired experience purely in the fields of investigations, inquiries, research and legal matters. While the rest of the cases related to issues of qualifications and gain of experience certificates after appointments.
