Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan, J.--Umer Said, Yousaf Khan and Ali Akbar having been appointed as Class-IV employees in the Education Department on 1.9.1995, 15.6.1993 and 17.4.1993 respectively, their services were terminated on 19.7.1997 on the only ground that they were not the donors of land to the department. Through the impugned judgment dated 18.5.2004, the learned NWFP Service Tribunal Peshawar accepted their appeals against such termination but directed the department to adjust the appellants against Class-IV vacancies, as and when occur.
2. The department has not challenged the judgment aforesaid but present appellants have come to this Court seeking leave to appeal on the simple ground that once their terminations were declared void ab initio, they were bound to be reinstated with all back benefits.
3. The learned Additional Advocate General informed that the petitioners have accordingly been adjusted with effect from 18.10.2004. Be that as it may, the fact remains that their readjustment was a fresh appointment for all intents and purposes, having not accounted for the period between 1997 to 2004.
4. This Court in 1993 SCM R, 1287 has categorially observed that the policy of making appointments against land grants is tantamount to the sale Of public office for property, and further, that it was not only against the Constitution but also not conducive to public interest. We reiterate that such appointments are void ab initio Amazingly, in the instant cases, the competent authority has, in flagrant disregard of the aforesaid verdict of this Court, had terminated the services of the petitioners because they could not donate lands to procure the job.
5. Once it is held that the termination of an employee, is void ab initio, they become entitled to reinstatement with back benefits and cannot, despite such decree, be left at the mercy of the department for adjustment which may or may not occur or which may or may not be possible. The conclusion arrived at by the learned Tribunal was, therefore, unlawful and amounted to giving no relief to the successful appellants. Consequently, the petitions in hand, after conversion into appeals, are hereby accepted and the petitioners are reinstated with effect from the date of their removal, with back benefits.