Lahore High Court sets aside supersession of two senior bureaucrats

LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) has struck down the supersession of two senior civil servants and held that the Central Selection Board (CSB) cannot deny promotions on the basis of hearsay, rumours or unsubstantiated claims.

In a detailed judgement, Justice Khalid Ishaq allowed two connected constitutional petitions filed by retired Capt Muhammad Usman and Aamir Aqiq Khan. The two officers had challenged their supersession, which had been conveyed to them through letters dated Aug 7, 2025.

The case centred on the 30 per cent marks assigned to the CSB under the Civil Servants Promotion Rules, 2019, with the remaining 70 per cent based on an officer’s service record. According to the judgement, both petitioners had unblemished careers and performance evaluation reports graded as outstanding or very good. Despite that, the CSB gave them unusually low scores of 9 and 8 out of 30, which left them below the threshold required for promotion to BPS-21 and BPS-20, respectively.

According to the petitioners’ counsel, the board had unlawfully recommended supersession by making broad allegations including questionable integrity, harsh behaviour, alleged compromised financial integrity and use of political connections.

Court findings

Justice Ishaq observed that the criteria set out in the Promotion Rules, 2019 were designed to guard against arbitrary decision-making. He held that even assessment heads dealing with personal attributes such as personality profile, conduct and integrity did not give the CSB unrestricted authority.

The judge ruled that the board’s discretion must remain tied to official dossiers and documentary material. Attributing the observation to the judgement, the court said: "There is absolutely no room for hearsay, rumours, generalisation or gossip about an officer under consideration for promotion."

Citing the maxim nemo repente fuit turpissimus, meaning no one becomes dishonest all of a sudden, the judge said that if board members chose to depart from years of favourable annual reports, they were required to record specific reasons backed by tangible material.

The judgement noted that during proceedings, the federal government’s law officer had been given opportunities to place on record any material that could support the serious allegations against the officers. However, the only documents produced before the court in a sealed envelope were standard personal profiles and evaluation reports, and these contained no adverse remarks.

Justice Ishaq further observed that the marking pattern showed irrelevant and baseless deductions across categories, apparently to keep the petitioners below the passing threshold. He said the use of such unstructured discretion could seriously harm an officer’s professional reputation and personal life.

Relief granted

Rejecting the government’s objection to the maintainability of the petitions, the judge ruled that although a civil servant cannot claim promotion as a vested right, they do have a fundamental right to be considered for promotion through a fair, transparent and lawful process.

The judgement added that good governance could not be achieved through arbitrary exercise of discretionary powers without proper application of mind. The court set aside the impugned letters of supersession and directed the federation to reconsider both officers for promotion in an impartial, fair and lawful manner.