2026 PLP 159 (PLC)

IQBAL AHMED KASI, J.

The instant Constitutional Petition filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, carries the following prayer clause: It is, accordingly respectfully prayed that record of the court below may kindly be called for and after examining the same, impugned order dated 06-10-2020 passed by the worthy single member NIRC at Quetta and impugned order dated 26-01-2022, passed by the Full Bench National Industrial Relations Commission at Karachi, may kindly be set aside and the Grievance Petition filed by the present petitioner may kindly be allowed whereas the respondent may be directed to reinstate the petitioner w.e.f. 30-08-3019, with all back benefits with any other relief deem appropriate a per the circumstances of the case and cost through out, in the interest of justice, equity and fairp play.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed in the establishment of QESCO, as LS-I, against son quota on contract basis, vide order dated 23.05.2018, which was time to time extended. What happened was that, one Mst. Khalida Perveen widow of Dr. Allah Bakhsh, filed an application to the office of the respondent, highlighting therein that the petitioner has already been convicted by the competent Court of law, which conviction was maintained by the Hon ble Supreme Court of Pakistan, so he is not entitled to remain on job. With the same facets, the respondent issued letter dated 30.08.2019 ( the impugned letter ), whereby, the contract of petitioner s appointment was not extended. 2(sic) The petitioner has preferred a grievance notice to the respondent, which was not replied, so he filed his grievance petition. On notice, the respondent contested the petition by filing written statement and controverted the claim of the petitioner on legal as well as factual grounds.

3. The learned Member, National Industrial Relations Commission, Quetta Bench, after hearing arguments of both the parties has passed the order dated 6th October, 2020 ( the impugned order ), whereby, the grievance petition of the petitioner was dismissed.

4. Feeling aggrieved from order of the Single Bench, the petitioner filed appeal before the National Industrial Relations Commission, Islamabad, Full Bench at Karachi ( the lower appellate forum ). Who after hearing the parties, vide order dated 26.01.2022 ( the impugned order ) also dismissed the appeal of the petitioner, hence this petition.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the lower Courts have failed to appreciate the documents filed by the petitioner and also failed to give any plausible and cogent reason for dismissal of grievance petition and appeal of the petitioner. He further contended that at the time of appointment of the petitioner, he had already undergone his sentence and at the time of appointment in this regard, he did not conceal the material facts, because no question was put in this behalf.

6. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the available record, which reveals that the petitioner was nominated in a murder case. He was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment by the trial Court, whereas, in appeal, this Court, while maintaining the conviction of the petitioner, reduced his sentence from life imprisonment to that of 10 (ten) years. The judgment of this Court was further assailed by the petitioner before the Hon ble Supreme Court of Pakistan, whereby, his conviction was maintained, however, the period of sentence was reduced from 10 (ten) years to that of 05 (five) years, which he undergone in Jail. Since the sentence of the petitioner remained upheld upto the Hon ble Supreme Court of Pakistan, and a murder case falls within the definition of moral turpitude , therefore, the petitioner is not entitled of any Government job. Moreover, the expression moral turpitude has been explained in words and phrases Permanent Edition 27-A, which reads as follows: In determining whether the crime is one involving moral turpitude , the test is whether the act denounced by the statute offends the generally accepted moral code of mankind.

Moral turpitude is a vague term, and its meaning depends to some extent on the state of public moral; it is anything that is done contrary to justice, honesty, principle or good morals; and act of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the private and social duties which a man owes to his fellow man, or to society in general, contrary to the accepted and customary rule of right and duty between man and man; it implied something immoral in itself, regardless of fact whether it is punishable by law.

7. At this stage when the learned counsel for the petitioner was asked to refer any law that a convicted person can be appointed on Government job, he failed to do so. Hence no other illegality or irregularity has been found in the both orders dated 6th October 2020 and 26.01.2022, passed by the Member, National Industrial Relations Commission, Quetta Bench and National Industrial Relations Commission, Full Bench, Islamabad at Karachi, respectively, warranting interference by this Court. In view of above Constitutional Petition No.1057 of 2022, is hereby dismissed in limine. SA/148/Bal. Petition dismissed.