Quota

  1. In AJK quota system is being observed — Before advertising the post it is mandatory for the department to determine quota of districts. Mushtaq Ahmed  v. Agriculture Department & 7 others 2004 SCR 293 (B)
  2. The department has not taken pain to make the situation clear and has not stated the correct facts as required by law — It was directed that the official respondents of the Education Department shall first of all determine in clear terms that how many vacancies were available with the department, out of which how many were reserved for direct recruitment and how many for departmental promotion — Vacancies reserved for departmental promotion shall be filled in by promoting deserving candidates in accordance with law from back dates  — The vacancies reserved for direct recruitment, after advertising the same in some daily newspapers, shall be filled in out of desirous candidates on the basis of merit — Till that time present arrangement shall not be disturbed. Shafqat Hayyat v. Muhammad Shahid Ashraf & 18 others 2005 SCR 57 (F)
  3. Quota was to be strictly adhered to. Mubarak H.  v. AJK P.S.C. 2005 SCR 93 (A) 1999 SCR 243 rel.
  4. Quota system must be observed and followed strictly — In case of promotion if the post falls to a particular category and a candidate is available from that category, the deviation cannot be allowed and any such order or notification found derogatory would be of no legal effect. Muhammad Aslam v. Azad Govt. & 3 others 2007 SCR 150 (B)
  5. As for codal background is concerned, through notification dated 28.11.1991 a specific provision was added in section 3 of Azad Jammu and Kashmir  Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1977 — All components of Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Refugees settled in Pakistan have a separately fixed quota — The notifications issued from time to time reveal that in case of failure of a particular person to qualify the test and interview for any post, the appoints have to be made on merit out of successful candidates from other districts — Every administrative unit is to be given representation in the services of Azad Jammu and Kashmir according to reserved quota — Quota system in services of Azad Jammu and Kashmir begins from 16.3.1971 when it was ordered that 10 % of vacant post shall be filled in from backward areas of Azad Jammu and Kashmir — Subsequently regional quota was introduced on 12.3.1972 — Subsequently it was provided that if a suitable candidate possessing required qualification is not available from a district, the appointment will be made from amongst suitable candidates from other districts — This position continued till section 3 of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Servants  (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1977 was amended — The codal provision has also been followed and acted upon by the Government of Azad Jammu and Kashmir — If any deviation was made, this Court recalled the orders so issued. Jamil Ahmed & another v. Inspector General Prisons and 4 others 2007 SCR 509 (C)
  6. Notification No. S&GAD/R-4/ (347)/99, dated 26th May, 2003 read with notification dated 9th February, 1994 — 20% quota reserved for the children of employees of grade B-1 to B-5 — appointment of — argument that irrespective of the distinction of area the children of any of the retired or serving civil servant can be appointed against the post reserved in 20% quota — held: argument has no force. According to notification dated 9th February, 1994, the posts of grade B-1 to B-5 have been specifically reserved for the residents of the constituency wherein the post falls vacant or created.  If a post falls vacant in the territorial limits of any particular constituency, only a person from said constituency can be appointed against the said post and none else—the Notification dated 26th May;, 2003, through which 20% quota for the children of the civil servants of grade B-1 to B-5, either serving or retired, does not override the notification dated 9th February, 1994 which reserves the posts of grade B-1 to B-5 for the residents of the relevant constituency. Further held: the children of serving or retired civil servants, B-1 to B-5 are entitled to avail 20% quota in their respective constituencies. Faisal Iqbal v. Deputy Director Commercial & 5 others 2014 SCR 553 (A)
  7. Notification dated 6th May, 2008 — implementation of — Teachers’ sons/daughters quota in education service — observed: that in the notification, the quota is not only fixed for the primary teachers and junior teachers/ teachresses, it is fixed for the sons/daughters of all the teachers. Saadia Shamshad & 2 others v.The Secretary Education & 3 others 2016 SCR 80 (D)
  8. Reserved for the serving staff against the lower post — quota reserved in different departments i.e Electricity & Revenue etc. — Held:  firstly the quota shall be determined and thereafter the post shall be advertised, qualified persons shall be eligible to apply and appointment shall be made on the recommendations of the relevant Selection Committee/Board. Muhammad Asim v. Secretary Forests & 3 others 2016 SCR 781 (A) 2014 SCR 533 ref.
  9. —Appointment as ASI against the quota reserved for refugees settled in Pakistan—challenged through writ of quo warranto—on the ground that father of the appointee/appellant is refugee settled in AJ&K—contention of the appointee/appellant that he was entitled to apply against the quota of refugee settled in Pakistan—Held: that after migration, the father of appellant got settled in AJ&K, therefore, the appellant cannot be considered a refugee settled in Pakistan. Syed Nazkat Hussain v. Zeeshan Azam & others 2019 SCR 301 (A) 2009 SCR 542 ref
  10. —Refugees of 1989 (and thereafter) — 6%- quota in service—appellant, a   refugee of 1990 does not fall in the category of Union Council or Town Committee — she has got a right to be considered against the reserved quota—Held: due to mal practice or failure of the authority to determine  6% quota, appellant cannot be penalized—while exercising inherent powers the Court directed the departmental authority to adjust and appoint the appellant against 6% quota— If according to calculation at the relevant time the vacancy of quota reserved for refugees of 1989 (and thereafter) is not available, then the appellant may be adjusted by applying carrying forward formula. Ayesha Nazir v. Abida Ghufar & others 2019 SCR 417 (A)
  11. —Quota in civil Service–Notification dated 02.04.2011, 6.50% Quota fixed for children of the employees and officers serving, retired or died during service of the Revenue Department–
  12. –to be selected through competitive examination to be conducted by the Public Service Commission—notification at the relevant time of filing of writ petition, the notification dated 03.03.2010 was in field whereby mode of appointment was selection through Public Service Commission—the condition of selection through Public Service Commission was relaxed through notification dated 15.01.2011, only for the children of employees who died during service. The appellant was son of retired employee not employee died during service, so notification not applicable to his case. Syed Muzahir Hussain & others v. Commissioner Revenue & others 2022 SCR 1073 (A)
  13.  — clause 1, Notification 12.3.1972 — clarification to determine domicile and quota of refugees settled in any district of Azad Jammu and Kashmir — Held: Clause 1, postulates that refugees settled in any district of Azad Jammu and Kashmir shall be as permanent residents of the district where they settled in as such. Sabeel Ahmed Chohan v. Iftikhar-ul-Hassan & others 2023 SCR 303 (R)
  14. — clause 2, Notification 12.3.1972 — clarification to determine domicile and quota of refugees settled in Pakistan — Held: refugees settled in Pakistan shall be treated as refugees in AJ&K despite the fact he later on settled in AJK for the purpose of the service, trade or otherwise. Sabeel Ahmed Chohan v. Iftikhar-ul-Hassan & others 2023 SCR 303 (S)
  15. — clause 3, Notification 12.3.1972 — clarification to determine domicile and quota of refugees of 1965—clause 3. Notifications 12.3.1972, clarifies that the refugees of 1965, shall be treated as refugees in AJK till settlement. Sabeel Ahmed Chohan v. Iftikhar-ul-Hassan & others 2023 SCR 303 (T)
  16. — district/regional quota in the Government services — adherence to quota prescribed under statute —The Constitution protects the rights of all State Subjects subject to adherence to law. District quota in Government service has to be maintained as required by statute for protection of rights of candidates holding respective domiciles. Sabeel Ahmed Chohan v. Iftikhar-ul-Hassan & others 2023 SCR 303 (G)
  17. — the Notifications 12.3.1972 and 24.8.1972 — object of notifications — [the notifications] were issued to determine and clarify the quotas of different functional units in government service. Sabeel Ahmed Chohan v. Iftikhar-ul-Hassan & others 2023 SCR 303 (P)
error: Content is protected !!