2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
ASIFA AMIN, EX-PTC TEACHER Versus DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER (W), BAHAWALNAGAR and another
| Citation | 2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Service Tribunal Punjab |
| Bench Members | Abdul Hafeez Cheema, Chairman |
| Parties | ASIFA AMIN, EX-PTC TEACHER Versus DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER (W), BAHAWALNAGAR and another |
| Primary Law | Civil service |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil service as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Service Tribunal Punjab bench comprising: Abdul Hafeez Cheema, Chairman.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (ASIFA AMIN, EX-PTC TEACHER Versus DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER (W), BAHAWALNAGAR and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Asif Nazir Awan for Appellant.
- Ch. Manzoor Hussain, D.A, for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 16th May, 2000.
Headnotes / Summary
Civil servant who was appointed as a P.T.C. Teacher by a properly constituted Selection Committee and possessed requisite qualification her services were terminated without any valid reason despite she stood confirmed in her appointment
Authority, defended termination order contending that appointment of civil servant was made on direction of Minister and that appointment orders were issued b"! District Education Officer whereas Competent Authority in her case was Deputy District Education Officer
Civil servant had performed her duties about a decade after her appointment and she stood confirmed as a P.T.C. Teacher
Authorities had no mandate in law to terminate services of civil servant in that manner even if her appointment was made under orders of Minister as that would not vitiate appointment especially when Minister had been granted powers by Competent Authority vide Notification No.S & GAD, dated 28-2-1989 and Chief Minister in his order had validated appointment of Minister
If any irregularity in appointment of civil servant was committed by Departmental Officer, civil servant could not be punished for said lapse by any rule of equity or justice
Order terminating services of civil servant being absolutely without any lawful authority, was set aside and civil servant was ordered to be re-instated in service with all back benefits. PLD 1964 SC 572; 1996 SCMR 413 and 1997 SCMR 15 ref.
Judgment & Decree
The appellant was appointed as a P.T.C. teacher on 16‑9‑198‑Annexure E). She continued to perform her duties faithfully and diligent but her services were illegally terminated on 1‑5‑1999 (Annexure J). The order was allegedly arbitrary, illegal and Without jurisdiction.
2. The appellant has assailed this order mainly on the grounds that she had been appointed by a properly constituted Selection Committee and she possessed the requisite qualifications. No valid ground has been shown by the respondents for ousting her from service when she stood confirmed in her‑appointment.
3. The department has defended the impugned order claiming that she was appointed on the direction of the Minister and her appointment letter was not available in the office record. It was further claimed that her appointment orders were issued by the District Education Officer, Bahawalnagar, whereas the competent Authority in her case was Dy. DEO concerned.
4. Arguments have been heard and record has been perused.
5. In this case the appellant has performed her duties about a decal and clearly she stood confirmed as a P.T.C. teacher. The respondents have mandate in law to terminate her services in this fashion. Even if the appointment was under the: orders of the Minister that did not vitiate the appointment inasmuch as the Minister had been granted power by the appointment Authority vide 'Notification of the S&GAD, dated 28‑2‑1989 (Annexure N). There is another aspect of the matter which calls for our attention. The Chief Minister vide his order, dated 12‑6‑1999 has validated the appointment of the Minister (Annexure O).
6. As for the objection that the competent Authority was Dy. D.E.O. concerned and not D.E.O. It may be noted hat this irregularity was committed by the departmental officers and for this lapse the appellant could not have been punished by any rule of equity or' justice. Reference in this behalf may be made to PLD 1964 SC 572, 1996 SCMR 413 and 1997 SCMR 15.
7. In this view of the matter, the impugned order is absolutely without any lawful authority and is hereby set aside. The appeal is accepted and the appellant is reinstated in service with all back benefits and she shall be deemed to be in service from the tiny she was removed by means of impugned order. However, there shall be no order as to costs. H.B.T./10/P(Sr.Trib.) Appeal accepted.