2005 PLP 1040 (SCMR)

‑‑‑‑R. 4(1)(b)‑‑‑Punjab Civil servants Act (VIII of 1974), S.2‑‑ Appointment gained on basis of bogus/fake order‑‑‑Removal from service‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Such appointee would not fall within definition of "civil servant" stricto senso for not having been appointed in accordance with law, but having manoeuvred his fake appointment‑‑‑Major penalty of removal from service, in such circumstances, could not have been imposed on such appointee‑‑‑Such penalty was converted into that of termination from service. Ahmad Awaiz Advocate Supreme Court and M.A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners (in all cases). Syed Shabbar Raza Rizvi, Advocate‑General, Punjab for Respondents (in all cases). Date of hearing: 25th February, 2003. JAVED IQBAL, J.‑‑‑

These petitions for leave to appeal are directed against judgment, dated 10‑7‑2002 passed by learned Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, whereby the appeals preferred on behalf of petitioners have been dismissed. In view of common questions of law and facts, the above captioned petitions are being disposed of by this order.

2. Precisely stated the facts of the case are that the petitioners were appointed as PTC Teachers in 1996 who were served with show‑cause notices in 1998 to the effect that as to why their service being fake may not be terminated. After completion of codal formalities and affording proper opportunity of hearing they were removed from service by means of order, dated 31‑3‑2001. The departmental appeals could not be decided within statutory period and resultantly the Punjab Service Tribunal was approached by whom all the appeals were dismissed, hence these petitions.

3. It is mainly contended by Mr. Ahmad Awais, learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioners that the appointments were made in accordance with law by following the prescribed Procedure which cannot be held "fake appointments" without having a thorough probe or comprehensive inquiry. It is next contended that the appointments were made as PTC Teachers in 1996 and show‑cause notices were issued in 1998 and they were removed from service in the year 2001 without affording proper opportunity of hearing and ignoring the fact that appointments were made by the competent authority. In order to substantiate his version reliance has been placed on Zahoor Ahmad Awan v. The State 1997 SCMR 1543.

4. We have carefully examined the above mentioned contentions in the light of relevant provisions of law and record of the case. We have minutely perused the judgment impugned. After having gone through the entire record we are of the considered opinion that the petitioner manoeuvred their fake appointments with connivance of the functionaries of Education Department and in fact they have never been recruited by the District Recruitment Committee and moreso, the selection list, concerning the said period, is silent regarding their names. On the recommendations of District Recruitment Committee, Kasur, 49 teachers were recruited on merit and admittedly the petitioners were not included in those 49 teachers. We are conscious of the fact that a copy of list was produced before the Punjab Service Tribunal containing the names of petitioners which hardly renders any assistance to their case as it was not signed by the Chairman of the District Recruitment Committee thus, no legal sanctity can be attached to it. The petitioners were removed from service after having an in depth scrutiny of entire record and affording proper opportunity of hearing to all petitioners. The genuineness of the appointments could not be substantiated by adducing any cogent and concrete documentary evidence and thus, it could safely be inferred that petitioners had manoeuvred their bogus appointments. The learned Punjab Service Tribunal after having gone through the entire material has concluded as follows:‑‑ "(4) We have considered the arguments from both sides and also gone through the relevant record. We find force in the contention of the respondents that the appointments of the appellants as PTC teachers were never recommended by the District Recruitment Committee headed by the Deputy Commissioner. The learned counsel for the appellant has been unable to show any record to establish the genuineness of the appointment orders or the selection of the appellants on merit. From documentary evidence as produced by the respondents it is crystal clear that the appellants managed bogus appointment orders in collusion with dishonest elements in the department which are not entered in the Register of Appointments. As held by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in their judgment reported as 2000 SCMR 907 when the orders were illegal, then no perpetual rights could be gained on the basis of such illegal orders and, therefore, the principle of locus poenitentiae was also not applicable. We are convinced that no miscarriage of justice has taken place in the case of the appellants who managed entry as PTC teachers through back door on the basis of bogus appointment orders. We also find that sufficient opportunity was, given to the appellants to defend their cause. "

5. A bare perusal would reveal that all the contentions agitated on behalf of the petitioners before the Punjab Service Tribunal have been dilated upon and dealt with in a comprehensive manner. The conclusion as arrived at by the learned Punjab Service Tribunal being well based and unexceptionable does not warrant any interference. Besides that no question of law of public importance is involved on the basis whereof leave could be granted. There is absolutely no misconstruction of law and fact.

6. It is, however, to be noted that the penalty of removal has been imposed by ignoring the fact that the petitioners do not fall within the definition of civil servants stricto senso as they were never appointed in accordance with law but maneuvered their fake appointments and thus, it is not understandable as to how the major penalty of removal was imposed upon the petitioners. The learned Advocate‑General, Punjab was called upon to address the Court on the said issue who frankly conceded and rightly so that no penalty of removal could have been imposed under the prevalent circumstances.

7. We are, accordingly inclined to partly accept these petitions which are converted into appeals and the judgment dated 10‑7‑2002 passed by the learned Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, is modified upto the extent that the removal from service is converted to that of termination from service. S.A.K./B‑100/S Appeals partly accepted.