MUHAMMAD AKHTAR SHABBIR, J. - This Judgment/Order will dispose of Labour Appeal Nos. 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, and 114 of 2005 as identical,question of law and facts are involved in all these appeals arising out of a consolidated judgment passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 8, Bahawalpur,in different grievance petitions of the respondents.
2. The facts giving rise to the present appeals are to the effect that during the period w.e.f. 1985 to 1992 the respondents were appointed as sweepers in basic pay scale No. 1 in Town Committee Tranda- Saway Khan, District Rahimyar Khan. In the year 2001, under the present system of the Local Government, Tehsil Council Tranda Saway Khan, merged in Tehsil Municipal Administration, Rahimyar Khan. Then Resident Assistant Director (Audit), T.M.A. Vide memo. No. RAD/T.M.A./RYK- 1000, dated 13.4.2002 objected and pointed out that during the verification of service books of these employees of Local Council i.e. Kot Samaba and Taranda Saway Khan the said respondents and some other employees had been appointed without performing procedure and coddle formalities.
This matter was brought to the notice of Government of the Punjab on 31.5.2000 by the Tehsil Council Administration. The Divisional Director Local Fund (Audit), Bahawalpur vide memo, dated 18.3.2002 had advised that the decision of the Government may be obtained before fixing pay of the employees. It was further suggested that the Government may be requested to grant approval for relaxation or otherwise. On 17.10.2002 vide letter. No. 2164, T.M.A., Rahimyar Khan requested the Secretary, Local Government and Rural Development Department, Government of the Punjab for relaxation and appointments of the employees of the Local Government Tehsil Council Tranda Saway Khan made during the period from November 1985 fo September, 1992, but that request has been declined and .Regretted vide letter dated 21.3.2005.
3. Feeling aggrieved the respondents filed their grievance petitions under Section 46 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 2002 praying that they be regularized as permanent employees and also claimed annual increments and other benefits w.e.f December, 2001 to onward. Their grievance petitions have been accepted by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 8, Bahawalpur vide consolidated judgment dated 5.7.1995. The T.M.A. Has impugned the said order through the instant Labour Appeals.
4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record.
There is no cavil with the fact that the respondents have been appointed on temporary basis in Tehsil Council Tranda Saway Khan and since then they have been performing their duties without any break in their service and they were appointed against permanent posts. Their service books have been prepared and maintained by the concerned office. The only objection against their appointments is that coddle formalities and procedure was not adopted. This defect of appointments has been pointed out by the Audit Department in the year 2001-2002 when the Local Council Tranda Saway Khan has merged in T.M.A. Rahimyar Khan. The Audit Officer has recommended to the Government of the Punjab for relaxation abd regularization of the appointment of the respondents which was rejected.
5. Without caring for that, the Government of the Punjab vide Notification regularized all the appointments- made on ad hoc basis in various Government departments against vacancies of BS-1 to 15 provided that they fulfill all the conditions for appointment of the posts. The employees of the statutory bodies were also entitled for regularization of their appointments under the Notification of the Government of the Punjab. This matter was dealt with by a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court in Case of Zutlfiqar Ali and others v. Director, Housing and others (1994 P.L.C.
(C.S.) 1442). The Court had re-instated all the ad hoc employee Whose services were terminated on the ground for nonperformance of coddle formalities. The Government of the Punjab Communication and Works Department issued a letter dated 16.1.1991 to the Chief Engineers Buildings Department South-and North Zones. Highway Departments South and Northern and Architecture Department, Lahore directing as under:--- "It has been observed that sanctioned/regular posts are lying vacant whereas work charge appointments are being made by the field officers. This practice is against the Government policy.
You are, therefore, requested to instruct all the field officers first to fill the regular vacancies by regularizing the services of work charged employees already working and then make the work charge appointments and that too in case of dire need."
6. In compliance with the. Said Notification Allah Wasaya, Muhammad Ismail, Muhammad Rashid son of Mukhtar and Mukhtar the work charge employees of Construction Sub-Division No. 11.
Bahawalpur were regularized against the vacant posts. They all were the employees of BPS-1 to 5.
The Executive Engineer, Provincial Work? Division, No. 4 Vide office order No. 201, dated 22.11.2003 regularized about 100 work charge employees. Those, are Malies, Drivers, Electricians, Severman, Chowkidars and work supervisor, etc. Photostat copy of the said order is placed on the record as marked "A". The respondents have not been given this benefit by the appellants and are still working against the permanent posts on temporary basis. They have been treated discriminatory by the appellants, as had these posts not been permanent vacancies, the respondents would not have continued their duties uptill today.
7. When confronted, learned counsel for .The appellants submitted that the respondents are still on their duties and the T.M.A. Does not intend to dispense with their services. In the case of Pakistan international Airlines Corporation through its Chairman Karachi and others V. Shahzad Faruq Malik and another (P.L.J. 2004 S.C. 145) the Hon'ble Supreme Court has also approved the order of the Service Tribunal where the services of the employees of the P.I.A. Were terminated as their appointments were made in violation of the relevant rules. The appointment of the respondents without performing procedure and the coddle formalities is not the fault of the respondents, rather it was the fault of the appointing authority and the appellant would not be allowed to take benefit of its own lapses for not regularizing the services of the respondents. In this context reference can be placed to the case of Secretary to Government of N W.F.P. Zakat/Social Welfare Department, Peshawar and another V. Sadullah Khan (1996 SCMR 413). Learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to point out any illegality or jurisdictional defect in the impugned order.
8. For the forgoing reasons, all these appeals having no force are dismissed in limine.