KARACHI: The Sindh High Court has ruled that the practice of appointing civil servants on ‘Own Pay and Scale’ (OPS), or acting charge, basis is a violation of the law and against public interest.

“Discretion of this nature, if allowed to be vested in the competent authority, will offend valuable rights of the meritorious civil/public servants besides blocks promotions of the deserving officers,” remarked a constitutional bench of the SHC.

The judges made these observations while allowing a petition filed against the OPS appointments in the Council for Works and Housing Research.

The two-judge bench comprising Justice K. K. Agha and Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon observed that the OPS appointment/posting did not have any sanction of law and “it impinged on the self-respect and dignity of civil/public servants who were forced to work under unduly appointed junior officers.

Appointments on own pay and scale or acting charge basis block promotions of deserving officers, rules constitutional bench

The bench noted that an appointment on a “current charge” basis was purely temporary in nature or a stopgap arrangement, which remained operative for a short duration until a regular appointment was made against the post.

“It is crystal clear that there is no scope of the appointment of a civil /public servant on an OPS basis except in exigencies appointment on an acting charge basis can be made, subject to conditions contained in the relevant rules,” it added.

Referring to various judgement of the Supreme Court, the bench noted that such practice had always been discouraged by the superior judiciary and it was not legally permissible.

The order stated: “Appointment on OPS/acting charge basis can neither be construed to be an appointment by promotion on regular basis for any purposes including seniority nor it confers any vested right for regular appointment.

Citing the Ministry of Science & Technology and others as respondents, petitioner Syed Muhammad Mehdi Raza Taqi submitted that he was an official of the Council for Works and Housing Research.

He alleged several irregularities about appointment and subsequent assigning the additional charge in a higher grade to Ali Ghor Baloch and stated that Mr Baloch was initially hired on a contract basis and later regularised as a PA in BPS-16 on November 17, 2017, with the condition that he will obtain a typing/shorthand certificate within three months.

Despite this, he was given the additional charge of Assistant Director (BPS-17) on an “OPS basis” in August 2021 without approval of the ministry concerned, he maintained.

The petitioner argued that the appointment in question has violated recruitment rules notified in January 2021, as it was a promotional post that required seniority and proper authority approval.

The bench set aside the impugned order of appointment and directed the authorities to fill the same post on a regular basis strictly under the recruitment rules.

Notices issued to railways

Another SHC bench issued notices to the Railways secretary and other officials on a petition filed against an appointment in the Railway police on an OPS/acting charge basis.

Raja Mohammad Shafiq, an official in the Railway police, petitioned the SHC and impugned the appointment of DSP Ameen Alam as the superintendent of railways police.

Citing a judgement of the apex court, the petitioner stated that the DSP was presently holding the post of SP in BS-17 despite the fact that many senior police officers were available for such posting, but they were overlooked.

A two-judge bench headed by Justice Sana Akram Minhas issued notices to the respondents as well as a federal law officer for a date to be fixed after two weeks.

Published in Dawn, October 2nd, 2025