ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Wednesday set aside the supersession and deferment of dozens of top bureaucrats in promotion matters, ruling that high courts can indeed review cases relating to the assessment of an officer’s “fitness” and “suitability”.
In a detailed judgement, authored by Justice Raja Inaam Ameen Minhas, the court held that the denial of fair consideration for promotion is subject to judicial review and that such disputes do not fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal Service Tribunal.
The ruling stemmed from a series of petitions filed by senior BS-20 officers who challenged their supersession or deferment by the Central Selection Board (CSB) during meetings held in March 2025.
The court ordered the government to reconsider the promotion cases of officers from the Police Service of Pakistan (PSP), Pakistan Administrative Service (PAS), Inland Revenue Service (IRS), Pakistan Customs Service (PCS) and the health sector. It noted that while promotion to senior ranks like BS-20 and BS-21 is not a vested right and depends on “fitness-cum-merit,” the process must adhere to constitutional guarantees of fairness, transparency and due process.
According to the judgement, the CSB’s proceedings “suffered from procedural impropriety”, noting that the board delayed communicating its reasons to the affected officers for months. While deliberations concluded in March, some officers were informed of the adverse decisions in September and others as late as December, it observed.
The IHC ruled the federation could not benefit in court proceedings from its own failure by withholding the reasons and then claiming the petitions were filed prematurely.
Among the petitioners was Dr Mutahir Shah of the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences, who challenged his deferment for promotion. The CSB had deferred his promotion, citing a “mixed reputation” regarding integrity and professional competence.
The court also examined the cases of several police officers who were denied promotion to BS-21. Dr Muhammad Akhtar Abbas was superseded after the CSB declared him an officer of “average competence and peccable integrity”. Nisar Ahmed Khan was reportedly denied promotion over integrity and professionalism concerns, including issues from an alleged voluntary return case.
In other police cases, Mujahid Akbar Khan was termed “professionally weak”, while Sheikh Yaseen Farooq and Israr Ahmed Khan were declared officers of average competence with “questionable integrity”.
The board cited “controversial financial integrity” in the case of Agha Muhammad Yousaf.
The lone PAS officer, Bilal Ahmed Butt, was superseded after the CSB noted his alleged “chequered history”, failure to attend mandatory training on three occasions and doubts about his financial integrity. A large number of IRS officers were also among the petitioners.
The CSB described Iqbal Ahmad Sheikh, Shakeel Ahmed Shakeel and Mirza Nasir Ali as officers of “average competence with questionable integrity”.
The promotions of Muhammad Mutiur Rehman Mumtaz and Muhammad Zahid were deferred for a “performance watch” over their “mixed reputations regarding financial integrity”.
During court proceedings, counsel for the petitioners argued the CSB used vague and non-specific reasons without confronting the officers with any adverse material. They contended many officers had clean service records and that the board had abandoned objective criteria outlined in promotion rules.
The federation defended the process, arguing that the CSB exercised “structured discretion” in its comparative assessment.
However, the court held that while it would not serve as an appellate body over the CSB’s decisions, administrative actions were subject to judicial review on the grounds of “illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety”.
Published in Dawn, May 14th, 2026
