And if he expands the scope of his work, that expansion is taken into consideration. If it does not fall within the scope of his official duties, his oversight of it is rejected and carries no legal effect. If it does fall within the scope of his authority, the matter must be one of two possibilities: either he assumed it lawfully or he did so wrongfully. If he assumed it lawfully, he is deemed to have undertaken it gratuitously and is not entitled to any increase beyond the remuneration stipulated for him. If he assumed it wrongfully, it must be restored to the person he wronged by taking it, and the official is held liable for this transgression.

If he stipulates an unspecified remuneration, he is entitled to the customary remuneration for comparable work. If the remuneration for the work is fixed in the dīwān (official register), and a group of officials have performed it at that rate, that amount becomes the customary remuneration for comparable work. If only one person has performed the work at that rate, it does not thereby become an established custom in determining the comparable remuneration.

If he specifies no remuneration at all—neither a defined amount nor an undefined one—does he nevertheless deserve payment for his work? According to the school’s analogical rule, if he is known to receive remuneration for his work, he is entitled to the customary remuneration for comparable work. If he is not known to receive payment for it, he is entitled to no remuneration.

If his duties involve the collection of revenue, his remuneration is payable from that revenue. If they involve no revenue, his remuneration is payable from the public treasury, from the allocations designated for public interests.

The Sixth Chapter: What Constitutes a Valid Appointment

We examine this as follows: if the appointment is verbal and is pronounced by the appointing authority, it is valid, just as in all other contracts. If it is made through a written, signed directive from the appointing authority rather than by a verbal declaration, the appointment is valid, and governmental offices are thereby constituted when it is accompanied by circumstantial indications confirming it, even though private contracts are not validated by such means, in view of the prevailing custom governing appointments, notwithstanding the juristic debate concerning contracts.

This applies when the appointment is confined to the appointee and does not extend to authorizing someone else to act in his place; it is not valid when it is general and extends to the appointment of others.

Once the appointment is valid under the conditions recognized for it, and the office previously had no overseer, this appointee becomes its sole overseer and is entitled to his remuneration from the moment he begins overseeing it. But if the office already had an overseer before he was appointed to it