📝 AI Summary — Plain-Language Overview
This case involved teachers at Pakistan Air Force (PAF) Inter-Colleges who wanted the courts to declare them "civil servants," which would entitle them to the same benefits, protections, and facilities that government employees receive.
These PAF colleges were originally set up to educate the children of Air Force personnel, and were later opened to civilian students too. Their operations were governed by an Air Force Manual, which set rules for administration, academics, and staff employment. However, the Court found that each institution was actually self-financing—funded through tuition fees, not government or PAF grants—and was run by its own Managing Committee, which had full power to hire, promote, and fire staff. There was no provision for transferring employees between PAF institutions, and the Federal Government had no role in running them.
Because of this, the Supreme Court held that these colleges were essentially private institutions, even though some PAF officers sat on their governing boards. The teachers' jobs were created under the institutions' own internal rules, not under any law establishing government/civil posts. Therefore, the employment relationship was simply "master and servant," not government employment.
Since the teachers weren't civil servants, their case couldn't be heard by the Service Tribunal (which only handles civil servant disputes). The Supreme Court dismissed their appeals, meaning they were not entitled to civil servant status or benefits.
Generated from the full judgment text below — not a substitute for reading the actual opinion.
Citation Name : 2011 PLC 103 SUPREME-COURT Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD MUBEEN-US-SALAM Side Opponent : FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Defence S. 2(1)(b)---Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), S. 4---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.212(3)---Air Force Manual (A.F.M. 54-2, dated 17-5-1992), Chaps. I, VI, VII & X---Appeal---Teachers of Pakistan Air Force Inter-College---Prayer of such teachers for declaring them to be civil servants and granting them benefits and facilities admissible to civil servants---Dismissal of such appeal by Service Tribunal---Validity---Such College being one of similar other educational institutions set up by PAF initially for providing education to child ren of its personnel and later opening same to civilians---Declared object of Air Force Manual (A.F.M. 54-2), dated 17-5-1992 was to standardize functions of such Institutions while acknowledging their independence---Such Manual covered all aspects of running of such Institutions including administration, academics and terms and conditions of service of their employees---Each school or college of PAF had a Board of Governors---Air Force Manual conferred functions and administrative control of every Institution on a Managing Committee, which amongst Air Force Officers included representatives of parents of students---Said Manual declared each Institution to be self-financing institution dependent upon funds collected as tuition fees and allied charges----Funds of such Institutions were non-public funds for purpose of accounting---Chairman of Managing Committee was responsible for all financial organizations and administrative matters of such Institution---Managing Committee had power to appoint, confirm, promote, dismiss and discharge employees of such Institution---According to said Manual, each Institution was a separate and distinct employer and there was no provision for transfer of employees from one P.A.F. Institution to another---PAF Manual as well as Statement of College Funds sir awed that they did not receive any public grants or contributions from Pakistan Air Force or Federal Government---Pakistan Air Force had no power either to appoint or remove employees of such Institution---Federal Government had not been assigned any role in functioning of such .Institution---Regulations contained in the Manual were not-statutory and in nature of administrative instructions for tanning and functioning such Institution---Letters of appointments of teachers showed that they had furnished undertaking to follow regulations in the Manual in letter and spirit---Such Institution was a private institution and not part of Pakistan Air Force or Federal Government, notwithstanding that personnel of PAF were included in their Managing Committee--Relationship of teachers being employees of such institution was that of `master and servant'---Posts held by the teachers were created under such Institutions' own Regulations, but not in manner posts in Government Departments were created---Posts held by such teachers were not "civil posts ", thus, they were not civil servants within meaning of S. 2(1)(b) of Act, 1973 as they were not connected with Defence or Federal Government---Appeals of such teachers before Tribunal were not maintainable---Supreme Court dismissed the appeals of such teachers.