1. ' TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.---This appeal with leave of the Court is directed against the judgment dated 23-7-1996 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), whereby the appeal filed by the respondent was accepted and he was reinstated in service with back-benefits.
2. ' The facts briefly narrated for the disposal of this appeal are that the respondent was appointed as Civilian Assistant (B-11) with effect from 13-7-1993 and was initially deployed in Production Planning Control Wing of M.R.F. Kamra. In January, 1995, due to sickness of has sister, he applied for leave and proceeded to his home-town. There he became indisposed and submitted medical certificates seeking extension in his leave. The Appellate authorities instead of referring his medical certificates either for verification by way of second opinion or to the Medical Board terminated his services through an order dated 6-2-1995 although in letter No,MRF/4437/CIS dated 23-2-1995 termination of service is mentioned as on 10-1-1995. It was pointed out in the aforesaid letter the he was informed about the termination on 6-2-1995. The respondent asked the authorities for his reinstatement in service and wrote a letter on 4-9-1995 to respondent No,3 i,e, the Director General, PAC, Kamara. In response thereto, he was informed on 23-9-1995 that his request for reinstatement in service had been considered and keeping in view his constant poor record, his services stood terminated. The respondent after exhausting all the departmental remedies filed an appeal before the Tribunal, which has been accepted through the impugned judgment. Hence, this appeal with leave of the Court by the appellants.
3. ' Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that the respondent was on an extended probation and his services could be terminated without issuing any show-cause notice.
4. ' We have considered the above contention and have gone through the entire material brought on record. We have noticed and it is not denied that the respondent was on extended probation period. However, he was neither issued any show-cause notice nor any charge-sheet to controvert the allegations levelled against him. The only allegation against the respondent leading to his termination from service was that he absented from duty for 12 days without any proper sanction of leave. We have noticed from the impugned order of termination that serious allegations of negative attitude and indiscipline were levelled against the respondent but he was not provided any opportunity whatsoever to put up his case. It would be appropriate to reproduce the termination order which is in the following terms:-- "1. You were employed w,e,f, 6th July, 1993 as Assistant BPS-11 at MRF under probationary period of one year. Because of your poor attendance, negative attitude and indiscipline behaviour towards service, the probation period was extended for another one year. You -were also informed accordingly vide letter No,MRF/4437/CPS dated 13th October, 1994 to mend your attitude in performance of your duties. You absented for 60 days from duty in a total service of one and half year. You were warned verbally as well as in writing on a number of occasions to mend your attitude towards service but you did not show positive improvement. Again you have absented yourself from duty w,e,f, 10th January, 1995 to-date.
2. Keeping in view these facts the Competent Authority has terminated you from Service w,e,f, 10th January, 1995 (date of absence). You are advised to desposit the security passes and arrange your clearance from MRF immediately."
5. It is true that the respondent was on extended probation but at least he should have been afforded minimum opportunity to present his case before the authorities. The learned Tribunal in the circumstances has not committed any illegality or irregularity in reinstating him in service when admittedly his services were terminated with stigma without providing him an opportunity to put up his case.
6. ' Keeping in view the aforestated features of the case, we are also of the view that the matter does not fall within the purview of Article 212(3) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan as no question of law of general public importance is involved herein. Resultantly, the present appeal being without any merit and force is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.