2006 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

NUR AHMAD SHAH, (MEMBER-II).

The above two appeals have arisen out of identical facts and circumstances and these are disposed of in one judgment.

2. The salient features as brought on record are. The appellant was appointed as JST (BS-9) in August, 1995. She was posted in the Government Girls High School, Jhol District Sanghar. She was deputed for C.T. Training. Meanwhile on 20-11-1999, her pay was stopped and on her representation, the same was released on 22-2-2000. Again the pay of the appellant and 7 other lady teachers was stopped on the report of Army Monitoring Team (AMT) Mirpurkhas on 1-11-2000, The appellant challenged the non-payment of her salary' before the Sindh Service Tribunal in Appeal No.285/2002, and continued to perform her duties without pay. The AMT reported that the appellant along with others were appointed on fake documents. Her services were accordingly terminated on 5-7-2002. She took up the matter with the higher authorities and getting no response from them within the statutory period, filed the present appeals. She requests for the release of her salary (Appeal No.285/2002) and quashment of the letter dated 3-2-2003 informing her about the termination of her services (Appeal No.76/2003). The respondents accused the appellant of lacking in prescribed academic qualification, forging the appointment letter of one Shahcena daughter of Muhammad Usman in her own name and producing a bogus medical fitness certificate. They slate that the appellant's services were terminated after the AMT declared her a ghost teacher, and that the staff who had connived at her appointment was punished.

3. Heard Ansari Abdul Lateef for the appellant and the A.A.-G. for the respondents. Perused the record.

4. The counsel for the appellant states that the appellant was appointee through a Selection Committee against some of the vacancies advertised in the press; that she was deputed for training which she completed successfully; that she served for more than seven years and gave no cause for complaint and yet her salary was stopped and she was removed from service; that the inquiry held into the genuineness of her documents found them correct and despite that her documents found them correct and despite that her services terminated. He relies on 2000 A PLC (C.S) 784; 2004 PLC (CS) 463; 2004 PSC (541); 2004 SCMR 281; 2004 SCMR

49. The A.A.-G. supports the impugned orders.

5. The appellant was appointed as Junior School Teacher (JST) in B-9 in August, 1995 and was deputed for C.T. Training in September, 1999. Meanwhile, in November, 1999, her salary was stopped along with her four other colleagues for the reasons not disclosed, not available on record. On her representation she was released her salary on 22-2-2000. On completion of her C.T. Training in August, 2000, she was reposted as JST (B-9) in the Government Girls High School, Jhol District Sanghar on 4-9-2000. Her salary was again withheld on 1-11-2000 on the directions of the ATM. This time it was followed by a charge-sheet dated 2-12-2000 accusing her of having secured her appointment "on the basis of forged documents." The charge-sheet is completely silent about the details of alleged forgery and the reasons compelling the authorities to reach such conclusion. It merely says that the enquiries has so revealed. It does not specify who held the enquires and whether the appellant was associated with such exercise.

6. The respondents, neither in their written statement nor in the arguments before the Tribunal have explained the reasons for first withdrawing the appellant's salary and then dispensing with her services as a ghost teacher, and that, too, after bearing her for well over seven years in a solitary passing reference in their written statement in Appeal No.285/2002, the respondents state the appellant's pay "was stopped on the direction of Army Monitoring Team, Mirpurkhas which found her appointment being fictitious and a ghost teacher." No copy of such direction has been furnished not it is clarified whether these directions, if any, were given verbally or in writing. There is, indeed, no mention of any direction from an Army Monitoring Team in the linked respondents' comments on the Appeal No.76/2003. No credence, thus, can be given to their assertion about the AMT's directions.

7. The appellant, on the other hand, claims to have been appointed to the post against the vacancies advertised by the Department in 1994. She has produced copies of interview call letter, appointment letter, and medical fitness certificate as supporting documents. The respondents have dismissed these documents as fake and manipulated. They have produced a letter from the Civil Surgeon, Sanghar who has denied to have issued or verified a fitness certificate in favour of the appellant. This clearly called for a thorough probe. Even an enquiry of sorts held in the matter concluded in the appellant's favour. The Inquiry Officer verified the genuineness of the appellant's matriculation, Intermediate, C.T. and Medical Fitness Certificate and found them correct and disproved the allegation of forgery against her.

8. In 2000 PLC (C.S.) 784 it was held that refusal of pay to an employee who is entitled to receive the salary "would amount to forced labour which is violative of the Constitution as also the principles of Islam and social justice." In a case reported in 2004 PSC 541, the apex Court upheld the rescission of an order terminating the services of, a teacher on the ground that her appointment was based on forged documents because no opportunity of hearing had been given to him before the termination of her services. In another case reported in 2004 SCMR 49, the apex Court set aside the dismissal of a civil servant accused of manoeuvering a bogus appointment after having rendered about six years service without affording him proper opportunity of hearing and completion of mandatory formalities as envisaged in the Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules.

9. The appellant's case falls in similar category. She, too was condemned unheard. 'The impugned action is perverse and whimsical. The stoppage of her salary followed by removal from service without proper inquiry has caused the appellant a grave miscarriage of justice.

10. In view of the above, we allow both the appeals and revoke the impugned orders relating to the stoppage of the appellant's salary and her removal from service. She is released her salary along with all legal dues and reinstated in service. H.B.T./50/KST??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Appeal allowed