Contract service cannot be counted towards promotion, rules SC

ISLAMABAD, (APP - UrduPoint / Pakistan Point News - 2nd Jul, 2026) The Supreme Court (SC) of Pakistan has ruled that service rendered on a contractual basis could not be counted towards the qualifying service required for promotion, holding that contract employees did not fall within the definition of a "civil servant" under the Sindh Civil Servants Act, 1973.

The court further observed that an unlawful benefit mistakenly extended to one employee in the past did not create a legal right for others to claim the same concession.

A three-member bench comprising Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi and Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui announced its reserved judgment in two civil appeals filed against a decision of the Sindh Service Tribunal.

Upholding the tribunal's ruling, the Supreme Court held that service rendered on a contractual basis could not be included in the minimum qualifying service required for promotion.

The judgment said that under the Sindh Civil Servants Act, 1973, and the relevant rules, a contract employee was excluded from the definition of a "civil servant." Consequently, contractual service could not be treated as equivalent to regular government service for promotion purposes.

The court distinguished between ad hoc and contractual appointments, observing that the two have different legal status.

<?php /*?> <?php */?>

An ad hoc appointment was a temporary arrangement that continued until a regular appointment was made, whereas contractual employment was governed by the terms of a fixed-term agreement and did not confer any right to permanent appointment or regularisation unless specifically provided by law or government policy.

The bench ruled that seniority and eligibility for promotion were determined solely from the date of regular appointment, and the period served under a contract could not be taken into account for that purpose.

The judgment further stated that if another employee had mistakenly been allowed to count contractual service in the past, such an error could not be cited as a legal basis for extending the same benefit to others. An illegal or erroneous action, the court said, could not be perpetuated on the principle of equality.

The Supreme Court also held that previous service in the Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) or any other Federal institution might be recognised for limited purposes, such as pay protection or pension, but could not be counted towards the qualifying service required for promotion in the Sindh government.

The court disposed of both civil appeals while maintaining the decision of the Sindh Service Tribunal.