2001 PLP 1128 (SCMR)

IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, C J.

The above appeals by leave of the Court, are directed against the judgment dated 17-4-2000 passed by a Full Bench of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in Service Appeals Nos.964 of 1999, etc.

2. Civil Appeals Nos. 1509, 1517, 1525 and 1526 of 2000 are variantly barred by time. After hearing the parties, sufficient ground is made out for condoning the delay. Order accordingly.

3. The facts of the case and the questions arising therefrom for consideration are succinctly stated in the leave granting order, relevant portion whereof reads thus: "

2. The facts relevant for disposal of petitions are that on 19th November, 1996 under Secretary (Cabinet II) addressed a letter to all the administrative Secretaries to Government of the Punjab under the 'subjects' 'Denotification of Political Appointments'. In pursuance of which of the Chief Minister, Punjab issued instructions vide letters, dated 24th November, 1996 to all District Health Officers in Multan Division Multan and others to denotify immediately all appointments made politically at the level of individual departments, their attached departments of the autonomous bodies under their control. The Director Health Services Multan Division, Mutlan vide Office Order No.589/E, dated 19th January, 1997 without serving show-cause notices upon the individual employees withdrew their appointment letters including the orders of their promotion considering them to be illegal, irregular during, ban period by unlawful authority and without proper recruitment policy in vogue at that time. In pursuance of such omnibus order the services of all the petitioners working with District Health Officers in Multan Division were consequently terminated.

3. The aggrieved employees preferred writ petitions challenging termination of their services in the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan but they could not-get any relief because their petitions were, dismissed in view of the bar of Article 212 of the Constitution pf Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Subsequent thereto petitioners presented appeals before Punjab Service Tribunal on 8th November, 1999 which have been dismissed vide impugned order.

4. Learned Punjab Service Tribunal declined to grant relief to the petitioners for the following reasons:-- (a) The appointments of the-appellants were made in violation of the rules and by a person who was not the appointing authority in these cases. All the posts against which the appellants have been appointed belong to the district cadre of the Health Department and the respective District Health Officers/Medical Superintendents were the appointing authorities in the present cases. (b) That no advertisement was made in the press inviting applications for these posts. (c) Neither merit lists of the candidates were prepared nor the applications were put up before the relevant District Recruitment Committees. (d) As per the report of Director Health Services Multan there is no official record of the applications made by the appellants and there is no record of the appointments order of the appellants on the basis of which they claimed their appointments and it has been informed that all these documents are bogus/fake. (e) In certain cases the appellants did not possess the prescribed qualifications. (f) In some cases erratic appointments were made and appellants obtained their appointments by resorting to unethical means.

5. Learned A.S.Cs. appearing for petitions pointed out that during pendency of appeals before the Service Tribunal and application under section 151, C.P.C. being No.505 of 1999 was submitted mentioning therein that the Circular/letter, dated 19th November, 1996 issued by the Cabinet Division Islamabad will have no application on the cases of the petitioners as per explanation offered by Health Department itself in letter, dated 26th Juae, 1999 in pursuance whereof termination of services of M/s. Muhammad Shabbir Hassan, Muhammad Akhtar, Muhammad Jamil and Abbas Ali placed in alike circumstances was found to be due to misunderstanding and ultimately their termination orders were withdrawn, as a result whereof all appeals filed by them before the Service Tribunal were disposed of because their grievances were redressed. Thus, it was prayed that they may also be treated at par with their colleagues whose services were denotified alongwith them but their termination orders have been withdrawn for reasons noted hereinabove. In this application it was also pointed out that one of their colleagues namely Mr. Muhammad Tufail Anjum Ex-DD Supervisor whose service was also denotified under the same circumstances has preferred Appeal No.1648 of 1997 which has been finally accepted by learned Member of the Tribunal namely Mr. Muhammad Aslam vide detailed judgment, dated 20th February, 1998, therefore, , it was prayed that this aspect also required consideration by the Tribunal. Thus, request . was made that documents pertaining to the above events may be allowed to be brought on record in the interest of justice. As per statement of Ch. Ghulam Qadir, Advocate during arguments all these facts were placed before the Tribunal but the impugned order neither mentions about filing of the application nor the facts stated therein were considered at all. It was further 'contended that in these cases without adhering to the Efficiency and Discipline Rules acid even without issuing show-cause notices to the petitioners their services were denotified in pursuance of letter of Cabinet Division which has no application so far as cases of petitioners are concerned. He further argued that petitioners have been treated discriminately qua their other colleagues whose services were denotified under the same circumstances but subsequently they were reinstated in the service. '

6. In response to pre-admission notice Mr. Nasim Sabir Additional Advocate-General appeared and contended that the cases of Muhammad Shabbir Hassan and others are distinguishable from the cases of the petitioners, therefore, no discrimination has been done with them and argument so advanced in this behalf being without substance may not be entertained.' '

7. After hearing learned counsel for parties in our opinion following points emerge for consideration'

(i) As to whether before denotifying the appointments of petitioner they were not entitled for show-cause notice in view of the principles of natural justice enshrined in the maxim audi alteram partem. (ii) As to whether petitioners have been subjected to discrimination by the Health Department because some of their colleagues namely Muhammad Shabbir Hassan and others whose appointments were denotified alongwith them but subsequently termination letters o: their services were withdrawn for amongst other reasons than circular/letter of Cabinet Division, dated 19th November, 1996 is not applicable on the employees of Health Department in the Province of Punjab; if so to what effect? (iii) As to whether circular/letter, dated 19th November, 1996 issued by the Cabinet Division of Federal Government was applicable on the employees of Health Department of Province of Punjab in view of the Explanation of the Health Department issued subsequently vide its letter, dated 26th June, 1999. (iv) What would be the effect of judgment of Service Tribunal announced on 20th February, 1998 in Appeal No. 1648 of 1997 in the case of Muhammad Tufail Anjum Ex-DD Supervisor working against the post of Sanitary Inspector. (v) As to whether letter of Cabinet Division, dated 19th November 1996 has any legal sanctity; if so it has been applied in letter and spirit on the employees of Health Department of Multan Division? Thus to examine above points leave to appeal is granted. However interim relief as prayed for has been declined but office is directed to fix these appeals within three months for final disposal."

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants as well as Mr. Tariq Khokhar, learned Additional Advocate-General, Punjab appearing on behalf of the respondents. Clearly, the termination from service of the appellants is not termination simplicitor but pursuant to the policy decision taken by the Chief Minister, Punjab for denotification of all political appointments in consequence whereof vide letter, dated 24th November, 1996, the Cabinet Wing of SGA&ID, Punjab instructed all District Health Officers in Multan Division and others to denotify immediately all appointments made on political basis. Consequently; the services of the appellants were terminated, admittedly, without serving show-cause notice.

5. The learned Additional Advocate-General, Punjab argued that the terminations of all the appellants were valid, in that, they were appointed illegally during ban on recruitment in violation of recruitment policy as well as all relevant rules but persons who were not appointing authorities in these cases. He further contended that some of the appellants did not posses the prescribed qualifications whereas the others who claimed their appointments having been made by competent authority, their documents of appointment were found to be bogus and fake.

6. Be that as it may and without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, which necessitates inquiry in each and every case individually and not in a rolled-up manner before passing the termination orders, it appears appropriate that in each case the competent authority should issue a show-cause notice stating therein, with particularity, the grounds for proposed termination within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of show-cause notices, each appellant shall furnish reply with liberty to raise all pleas available to him under the law. The competent authority, on receipt of replies, shall finally dispose of all these cases individually on merits and in accordance with law within three weeks thereafter through a speaking order, copy of which shall be sent to all concerned. In the event of a favourable decision, all qualified persons shall be entitled to reinstatement with full back benefits. In cases of those not found eligible or qualified to be retained in service they would be entitled to pursue their remedies before the appropriate Service Tribunal after complying with the requirement of departmental appeal/representation is there against.

7. The Director-General, Health Services, Punjab Respondent No.2 herein shall ensure the compliance of the preceding directions by the competent departmental authority/authorities.

8. In the result, all the appeals are accepted; the impugned judgment of the Tribunal dated 17-4-2000 is set aside and the cases are remitted to the departmental authority /authorities, in the light of the above observations, for decision afresh on-merits and in accordance with law.

9. Admittedly, the appellants are out of service-for over three years. therefore, we are not inclined to pass any ad interim order for their reinstatement at this stage.

10. With the above observations, the appeals are disposed of with no order as to costs. M.B.A./G-62/S Order accordingly.