1994 PLP 1275 (CLC)

Muhammad Sharif Chaudhry for Petitioner. Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, Deputy Attorney‑General for Pakistan for Respondent. Date of hearing: 6th February, 1994. This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 arises out of a service dispute.

2. The petitioner, who was working as Protocol and Transport Officer in the Pakistan Administrative Staff College, Lahore was compulsorily retired from service by the respondent on 31‑10‑1989. He challenged that termination by filing a Constitutional Petition (W.P. No. 9607/93) which came up for hearing before a learned Single Judge of this Court on 24‑8‑1993, when a representative of the respondent appeared and indicated his willingness to hear the petitioner in order to redress his grievance. That petition was accordingly disposed of. As nothing appears to have been done thereafter by the respondent, the petitioner has approached this Court again by filing this Constitutional petition reiterating that his compulsory retirement from service without the approval of the Prime Minister of Pakistan, was illegal and there was, in any case,‑ no occasion for imposing any penalty upon the petitioner.

3. Before the petition could be heard on merits, a preliminary objection has been raised by Mr. Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, the learned Deputy Attorney‑General for Pakistan as to the maintainability of this petition on the premises that the employment under the respondent, which is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act No. XXI of 1860 is governed by the principle of Master and Servant and as such no Constitutional petition can be maintained by its employees.

4. So far as the status of the respondent is concerned, it is evident from a perusal of the Articles and Memorandum of Association of Pakistan Administrative Staff College, Lahore (Annexure `R/1') that it is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. Its employees, therefore, are neither servants of State nor of a Statutory Corporation. The Service Regulations to which a reference has been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, have been framed in exercise of powers vesting in the Board of Governors under clause (xiv) of the Memorandum and Articles of Association which fact is so stated in the Service Rules themselves. It follows, therefore, that these Rules do not have any statutory force. Consequently, even according to the dictum laid down in the Principal Cadet College, Kohat and another v. A Muhammad Shoab Oureshi (PLD 1984 SC 170) cited by the learned counsel himself, no Constitutional petition can be maintained for violation of the said Rules. This view finds further support from the case relied upon by the learned Deputy Attorney‑General namely Ch. Muhammad Ibrahim Haleem Chishti v. Pakistan Council of Scientific and Industrial Research and another (1980 SCMR 831) wherein it was held that an employee in a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act is governed by the principle of Master and Servant and in case of any violation of any rule, or regulation no Constitutional petition can be made. To the same effect is the judgment of the Indian Supreme Court Sabhajit Tewery v. Union of India and others (AIR 1975 SC 1329). For the foregoing reasons, this petition is not maintainable and is dismissed with no order as to costs. A.A/M‑1493/L Petition dismissed.