FAKHRUDDIN G. EBRAHIM, J.-The orders impugned in these three petitions are recommendations made by the respondent No. 1 Service Board set up under M. L. O. 55 and the action taken by the appointing Authority in terms thereof.
2. The two petitioners in Constitutional Petition No. 1150 of 1978 were appointed as Office Superintendent and Senior Store Keeper respectively on 1-3-1973 by the Landhi, Korangi Municipal Committee. When this Committee was merged with the Karachi Municipal Corporation on 15-3- 1973 the petitioners in terms of the merger conditions became the employees of the Karachi Municipal Corporation. On 7-5-]978 M. L. O. 55 was promulgated under which was constituted the respondent No. 1 Board, who considered among other things the case of the said two petitioners and recommended as follows :-- "In view of the fact that his appointment to the post was out of turn it may not be regularised and he may be offered a lower post."
It is the case of the respondent No. 2, Administrator, Karachi Municipal Corporation that the finding given by the. Board was accepted by him and according to him therefore, the petitioners have ceased to hold the posts to which they were earlier appointed.
3. In Petition No. 1151 of 1978 the four petitioners who were originally recruited as Junior Clerks in Grade V by the Landhi Korangi Municipal Committee in the year 1973 were subsequently promoted as Senior Clerks in Grade VI. Their cases were also referred to the Board constituted under M. L. O.
55 and the identical recommendation made by the Board in relation to each of these petitioners reads as follows :- "His promotion being out of turn may not be regularised. He may be reverted to the post of Grade V."
The respondent No. 2, Administrator, Karachi Municipal Corporation has accepted this finding and reverted the petitioners in terms thereof.
4. In Petition No. 1152 of 1978 the two petitioners were recruited as Assistants in Grade VIII in the year 1973 by the Landhi Korangi Municipal Committee. Their cases also became subject-matter of proceedings before the Board constituted under M. L. O. 55 who recommended as follows :- "In view of the fact that his appointment on the post of Assistant being out of turn may not be regularised and he may be offered post in Grade VI."
The respondent No. 2 accepted this recommendation and accordingly ordered their reversion.
5. Coming to M. L. O. 55 it may be noticed that it provides for review of ad hoc appointments either in presence of the persons affected or by going through his service record to give findings on the following points enumerated in clause (6) of this M. L. O. :-
(i) Whether the ad hoc appointee is fit to be retained in the post held by him, in case of initial recruitment ;
(ii) if not, whether he should be offerred a lower or a different post subject to availability, keeping in view his qualifications and suitability ;
(iii) whether the promotion or transfer of ad hoc appointee was :accelerated or out of turn without a positive justifiable reason ;
(iv) if the promotion or transfer was not accelerated or out of turn without a positive justifiable reason, whether ad hoc appointee is fit to be retained in the post held by him."
These findings are to be forwarded to the appointing authority who is under Article (7) empowered to take action as under :-
(i) If the ad hoc appointee is not considered suitable for the post held by him or even for a lower or different post, his services shall be terminated on payment of salary for fifteen days ;
(ii) if the ad hoc appointee is considered suitable for a lower or a different post and if he consents to his appointment in such post, and in case such post is available, he shall be appointed thereto and, in case of non-availability of the post, his service shall be terminated and his name shall be kept on the waiting list and, if he declines to accept such appointment, his services shall be terminated provided that in the case of termination of the services of ad hoc appointee he shall be paid salary for fifteen days ;
(iii) If the promotion or transfer of the ad hoc appointee is considered to be accelerated or out of turn without a positive justifiable reason, or he is not considered suitable to be retained in the post held by him, he shall be reverted to the service or post from which he was promoted or transferred ;
(iv) if the ad hoc appointee is cleared by the Sind Punjab Service Com--mission, appropriate Board or Committee or the Select Committee, it shall be regularised by appropriate order ;
(v) notwithstanding anything contained in this para. If the ad hoc appointee is considered suitable by the Select Committee (para. 4) for holding the same post or equivalent post, order of his regularization in the same post or, as the case may be, his appointment in the equivalent post shall not be made before obtaining the approval of the Martial Law Administrator thereto."
6. Mr. Mazharuddin Siddiqi, the learned counsel for the petitioners raised two contentions in support of these petitions and these are that the petitioners were not given personal hearing and that there was no proper application of mind either by the Board or by the Administrator, Karachi Municipal Corporation before the impugned orders were made. The learned counsel also argued that the findings, given were even otherwise not justified.
7. As to the personal hearing we have noticed that the Board cons--tituted under M. L. O. 55 is empowered to review ad hoc appointment by interview or by going through the service record of the ad hoc appointee as it may deem necessary. It must, therefore, follow that it is within the discretion of the Board to follow one or the other procedure. In other words right of personal hearing has been expressly taken away giving the petitioners no cause for complaint on the ground that the recommendations were made by the Board without hearing them. It may however, be noticed that in so far- as the Board is concerned it merely makes recommendations and that may possibly be the reason for giving the Board discretion either to interview the. Ad hoc appointee or make the assessm ent of his ad hoc appoint--ment by going through his service record. In so far as the further action under Article (7) is concerned which is to be taken by the appointing authority which in fact is the order which has adversely affected the petitioners, there is no provision in the M.
L. O. One way or the other as to personal hearing to the persons affected. It is well-settled law that in absence of a contrary intent expressed by statute no order affecting status of a person can be passed without giving that person a right to personal hearing. In the present case this right was all the more necessary for we have found that the recommenda--tions made by the Board are perfunctory, irregular if net unjustified use of expression "out of turn" in relation to original appointees while that expression in M. L. O. 55 is used in relation Jo promotes and transferees and the recommendations does not even state how the appointment or the promotions were out of turn.
8. We, therefore, set aside the orders made by the respondent No. 2 under Article 7 of M. L. O. 55 with the result that before accepting the recommendations made by respondent No. 1, the respondent No. 2 will give an opportunity to the petitioners to be heard in the matter. In the circum--stances it is not necessary to examine the other contentions raised by the learned counsel and these petitions are disposed of in terms aforesaid with no order as to costs.