CDA delays Supreme Court ruling on contractual employees' regularisation
The Capital Development Authority (CDA) has not yet implemented a Supreme Court ruling declaring the regularisation of over 1,000 contractual and daily wage employees illegal, despite federal directives.
- Supreme Court ruling on employee regularisation.
- Legal uncertainty for over 1,000 CDA employees.
- CDA's non-compliance with federal directives.
ISLAMABAD: The Capital Development Authority (CDA) has yet to implement a Supreme Court ruling declaring the regularisation of contractual and daily wage employees illegal, despite most federal ministries and departments already complying with the court’s directions, official documents available with Business Recorder reveal.
The delay has left over 1,000 CDA employees in legal uncertainty as the civic agency continues to seek clarification from the Establishment Division regarding the implementation process.
According to documents, the Establishment Division had directed all ministries and attached departments to comply with the apex court’s judgment in the Mohsin Raza Gondal case, under which the regularisation of employees was declared unlawful.
The Ministry of Law and Justice, in an office memorandum, stated that such regularisations were “void ab initio”, meaning legally invalid from the outset. It further noted that the employees could not be treated as regular staff as the process lacked lawful authority, transparent policy and merit-based assessment.
The ministry also observed that the doctrine of “past and closed transaction” was not applicable and future appointments would have to be processed through the Federal Public Service Commission (FPSC).
Documents show that hundreds of CDA employees, including daily wage, contingent-paid and contract staff members from BS-1 to BS-17, had benefited from the regularisation policy introduced during 2012 and 2013.
The records show that 744 CDA employees, including 619 daily wage employees and 125 contingent-paid staff members, were among the beneficiaries of the regularisation process.
The committee had also considered regularisation cases of additional CDA employees, including four contract employees of the Human Resources Development Directorate, one daily wage medical officer, one administrative officer of the Career Planning Cell and 13 contract employees working in the Directorate of Arts and Crafts Village.
However, despite the court ruling and subsequent federal directives, CDA has not yet reverted the affected employees to their previous contractual or daily wage status.
Official correspondence shows that the authority is still seeking guidance from the Establishment Division regarding the mode and timeline for implementing the reversion process.
The records further state that the regularisation of employees had originally been made subject to availability of posts and fulfillment of recruitment criteria.



















Comments