Rasheed Tareen v Chairman Workers Welfare Board,
PLC (C.S) 2012 54 · Balochistan High Court
This case concerns a government engineer, Rasheed Tareen, who was sent on deputation from his parent department, Communication and Works (C&W), to the Workers Welfare Board Balochistan, where he served as Director (Works). His deputation was extended for a fixed period, but before any further extension or permanent absorption was formally approved, the Welfare Board issued a notification sending him back to his parent department. Tareen challenged this, arguing that recommendations from the provincial government and a No Objection Certificate meant he had effectively been permanently absorbed into the Welfare Board and could not be returned.
The Balochistan High Court rejected his petition. It explained that a deputationist remains an employee of his parent (lending) department unless he is formally and validly absorbed into the borrowing department through proper procedure, such as approval by the relevant Selection Committee or Board under the applicable service rules. Mere recommendations or an NOC, especially one later withdrawn, do not amount to permanent absorption. The court held that deciding whether someone is permanently absorbed involves terms and conditions of service, an issue that falls under Article 212 of the Constitution, which bars the High Court from intervening under Article 199. Since the petitioner's lien with his parent department remained intact, he was not an "aggrieved person" entitled to relief, and the petition was dismissed.
This case clarifies that deputation does not automatically become permanent employment and reinforces limits on constitutional courts interfering in civil service matters governed by specialized service tribunals.
یہ مقدمہ ایک سرکاری انجینئر رشید ترین سے متعلق ہے جسے ان کے اصل محکمے، کمیونیکیشن اینڈ ورکس (سی اینڈ ڈبلیو)، سے ورکرز ویلفیئر بورڈ بلوچستان میں ڈیپوٹیشن پر بھیجا گیا تھا، جہاں انہوں نے ڈائریکٹر (ورکس) کے طور پر خدمات انجام دیں۔ ان کی ڈیپوٹیشن ایک مقررہ مدت کے لیے بڑھائی گئی تھی، لیکن مزید توسیع یا مستقل انضمام کی باقاعدہ منظوری سے پہلے ہی ویلفیئر بورڈ نے ایک نوٹیفیکیشن جاری کر کے انہیں واپس ان کے اصل محکمے بھیج دیا۔ ترین نے اس فیصلے کو چیلنج کیا اور موقف اختیار کیا کہ صوبائی حکومت کی سفارشات اور ایک "نو آبجیکشن سرٹیفکیٹ" (این او سی) کی موجودگی کا مطلب یہ تھا کہ وہ عملی طور پر ویلفیئر بورڈ میں مستقل طور پر ضم ہو چکے تھے اور انہیں واپس نہیں بھیجا جا سکتا تھا۔
بلوچستان ہائی کورٹ نے ان کی درخواست مسترد کر دی۔ عدالت نے وضاحت کی کہ کوئی بھی ڈیپوٹیشنسٹ اپنے اصل (بھی