ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has directed the Chief of Naval Staff to decide the controversy related to forced retirement of an officer.

Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahan­giri issued the directive while hearing the petition of a naval officer, Lieutenant Hafiz Muham­mad Habibullah, who reportedly went missing on April 12. However, it later emerged that he was in the custody of the naval authorities for disciplinary reasons.

According to the petition, the officer was inducted in Pakistan Navy, and after successful completion of his initial training from Pakistan Naval Academy, PNS Rahbar, and grant of Short Service Commission, he was transferred to PNS Zafar on Sept 11, 2019. The naval intelligence later on Sept 14, 2022 arrested him, only to be released a day later. He was again picked up on Oct 26, 2022, and was released after two days of detention. He was finally removed from service.

However, the naval authorities informed him that he has been compulsory retired.

His counsel Inamur Rahim contended before the high court that the federal government has approved compulsory resignation of the petitioner under PN Rule 11(1)(a).

Defence counsel argues only federal cabinet can compel an officer to resign or retire him from service

He contended that it is provided in Pakistan Navy Rules that only federal cabinet can compel an officer to resign by force or to retire him from service. But in the instant case, the federal cabinet did not compel the petitioner for forcible compulsory resignation; rather, it was mentioned in the impugned order that the federal cabinet has approved the same, so the meanings of the “approved” and “compelling” by the cabinet are two different actions, therefore, impug­ned order is erroneous, illegal and not tenable under the law.

He pointed out that the relevant provisions of Pakistan Navy Rules, empower the petitioner to file representation before the Chief of Naval Staff, and according to rules, the naval chief is required to make a decision on the same.

Advocate Rahim, however, argued that the petitioner had filed the representation, but the competent authority was yet to decide it. He requested the court to issue a direction to the naval chief for deciding the representation of the petitioner “expeditiously”.

Subsequently, Justice Jahangiri ruled, the “Chief of the Naval Staff is directed to decide the representation, if filed by the petitioner in accordance with laws/rules… strictly in accordance with law as well as purely on merits after affording opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner”.

Published in Dawn, July 23th, 2023