Government cannot act as rival in inter-employee disputes, rules SC

ISLAMABAD, (APP - UrduPoint / Pakistan Point News - 24th Jun, 2026) The Supreme Court of Pakistan has upheld the decision of the Sindh Service Tribunal in a seniority dispute involving college lecturers in Sindh and dismissed all petitions filed by the provincial government, observing that in matters relating to seniority, the genuinely affected parties are the employees concerned, not the government.

The Court held that where no employee challenges a tribunal’s decision, the government, as a neutral employer, should implement the ruling rather than prolong litigation as an adversarial party.

According to a detailed judgment, a three-member bench comprising Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi and Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui decided 18 civil petitions filed by the Government of Sindh. The detailed judgment was authored by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar.

The case arose from appointments of lecturers (BS-17) in various subjects in the College education Department. The Sindh Public Service Commission (SPSC) had recommended candidates for appointment at different times and through separate selection processes.

Subsequently, a consolidated seniority list was prepared, prompting objections from certain lecturers who contended that their dates of selection had not been properly considered while determining seniority.

After exhausting departmental remedies, the affected lecturers approached the Sindh Service Tribunal, which, through a majority decision, ruled in their favour and directed corrections in the seniority list.

The Supreme Court held that Rule 11(a) of the Sindh Civil Servants (Probation, Confirmation and Seniority) Rules, 1975 clearly provides that an employee selected in an earlier recruitment process shall rank senior to an employee selected in a later process.

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

The Court observed that this fundamental principle cannot be ignored merely because a combined seniority list has been prepared.

The judgment noted that the seniority of English lecturers had already been corrected on the same basis because their appointments stemmed from a separate advertisement and an earlier recruitment process. Therefore, applying a different standard to lecturers of other subjects would be contrary to the governing rules.

Referring to earlier precedents, the Court reiterated that the dates of selection and recommendations are material factors in determining seniority and cannot be disregarded. It held that the Sindh Service Tribunal had correctly interpreted and applied the relevant service rules.

The Supreme Court also highlighted an important legal principle, observing that in seniority disputes the real aggrieved parties are the employees whose rights are directly affected, not the government itself. The Court stated that if no employee challenges a tribunal’s decision, the government should act as a neutral employer and implement the judgment instead of assuming the role of a contesting litigant.

The bench further observed that the Government of Sindh had failed to demonstrate any legal injury or violation of its rights arising from the tribunal’s decision. Consequently, the principle of “No Aggrieved Person, No Appeal” was also applicable in the present case.

Finding no legal defect, irregularity or jurisdictional error in the Sindh Service Tribunal’s ruling, the Supreme Court dismissed all civil petitions filed by the Government of Sindh and upheld the tribunal’s decision in its entirety.