2020 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

MALIK HAQ NAWAZ, J.

As claimed in the instant writ petition the petitioner was appointed as Naib Qasid in the year 2012, whose services were regularized on 01.03.2017, by a four member committee. The petitioner was adjusted in Government Boys School Astore against a clear vacant post.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved of a notification issued by Secretary Education Gilgit-Baltistan dated 08.11.2017, whereby the services of some other persons including the petitioner were terminated and he has filed the instant writ petition with the prayer that the said notification being illegal be declared null and void the appointment order dated 01.03.2017 be maintained.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was no legal justification with the respondent to cancel the appointment order of the petitioner. Per learned counsel if the appointment of the petitioner was made without codal formalities, even then he was required to issue a show-cause notice and an opportunity of hearing was to be provided to him. The termination of the petitioner is against the concept of natural justice, which requires interference of this Court. The learned counsel relied on 2004 SCMR 303, 2001 SCMR 934, 2008 PLC (C.S.) 722, 2008 PLC (C.S.) 715 in support of his contentions.

4. The learned Assistant Advocate General opposed the petition and submitted that the petitioner and many others were appointed through back door channel and after proper and through probe, their services were terminated on the plea that they were appointed because of some extraneous considerations. The learned A.A.G. further submitted that in a case of similar nature in Writ Petition No. 251/2017, (titled Sahib Jan v. Provincial Government decided on 25.05.2018), this Court has dismissed the writ petition in the similar circumstances. There is no legal justification in the instant writ petition, which may be dismissed in the interest of justice.

5. The notification regarding cancellation of appointments of petitioner and others departments where the appointments were made without test/interview and codal formalities were not declared illegal. The appointments were procured through illegal means and by using back door channels. It was so held by this Court in a judgment/order passed in Writ Petition No. 251/2017 (titled Sahib Jan v. Provincial Government). Paras 5 and 6 are relevant in the case in hand, which are being re-produced for ready reference:- "We are sorry to observer that we are daily coming across such illegalities being committed by Heads of the Departments, who never hesitate to appoint their blue eyed person either for extraneous consideration or because of political influence. The appointing authorities know that there is not check and balance system and on detection of these illegalities they will go Scott free and their assumption is 100% correct. We also feel ourselves at pain, while turning down the request of petty employees. Instead of punishing lower grade employees strict action should have been taken against the responsible high officials, but who will (?) the reply is always a big "(NO) " which is a question mark on our system, which is near to crumbled. It would have been more appropriate to order recovery of pay and allowances paid to the petitioner from the salary of District Education Astore, who appointed them illegally and caused heavy loss to Government exchequer or from his pension if retired. We for certain reasons restrained ourselves to pass any such order and the matter is left with the Chief Secretary Gilgit-Baltistan, who shall initiate necessary action against the responsible officials of Education Department, who crucified numbers of families of the petitioners firstly by appointing and secondly terminating them."

6. Now coming to the case in hand, the appointments made without advertisement and completion of codal formalities could be undone by the competent authorities and no notice under law is required to be issued. Wisdom is drawn from a judgment reported in 2012 SCMR 673, wherein it has been held as under:- Civil service

"Appointments made without advertisement of vacancies, inviting of applications and completion of codal formalities, termination of service of such employees without providing them opportunity of "approached Court with clean hands"_____III-gotten gains could not be protected

Such employees had got their appointments through back door thus could not agitate any grievances on pretext of denial of due opportunity of hearing to them. Such employees could not challenge principal of good governance at highest level mandating each and every appointment in Government service to be made on merit as per relevant rules and completion of codal formalities appeals filed by such employees were dismissed in circumstances."

7. Since the appointments were made in clear violation of rules/regulations and without due process of law. There was no need to issue show cause notice before issuing termination orders. There is no substance in the writ petition which is dismissed accordingly. SA/20/GB Petition dismissed