1. ' By this common order, we propose to decide above three Constitutional Petitions as common question of law and facts is involved in these petitions. In Constitutional Petition No,604 of 2009, the petitioners have prayed for the following relief:--
(i) The honourable Court may be pleased to direct the respondents Nos.1 and 2 to absorb the petitioners permanently into the service of the NBP as from 15-9-2003 as they have already absorbed the other temporary Godown Chowkidars according to their on circular dated 1-8-2003 with all back-benefits and not to make any discrimination with the petitioners.
2. ' The petitioners in this petition have stated that they were appointed as Godown Chowkidars from 1994 to 2003 and they were posted at various places. The petitioners have further stated that though they were appointed as temporary Godown keeper but they were put to work on important seats of Bank as Maintenance of all Branch returns, General Banking, General duties at Regional office Larkana, Bills and remittance, cash department on cash counter, Credit department, including preparation of returns, Advances, Inward and outward clearing. It is further stated by the petitioners that the respondent No,1 is empowered to confirm the services of the petitioners and respondent No,2 is head of Human Resources and Admn. Group Chief of the Bank and he has all powers to absorb/confirm/regular the services of the petitioners as permanent employees of the Bank. It is further contended by the petitioners that they time and again approached the respondents and so also their names were recommended by the Controlling Officer Larkana for absorption as permanent employees of the Bank. It is further contended by the petitioners that the legal notices have also been served upon the respondents but to no avail. It is further stated by the petitioners that they have served in National Bank of Pakistan in various Branches and have got experience of more than ten years. It is further stated by the petitioners that yet respondent No,1 has issued Circular/Standing Order bearing No,10/2003 on 1-8-2003, in which it has clearly been mentioned that:---
(a) Clerical: All such clericals who have completed 3 years as on date with minimum qualification of secondary school certificate (Matriculation) or an equivalent examination and with a satisfactory record shall be given employment by the Bank with effect from September 15, 2003 in the regular cadre in line with their qualification and experience.
(b) Non-Clerical: All such non-clericals who have passed their matriculation examinations and have minimum 5 years Banking experience as of June, 2002 shall be given employment by the Bank with effect from September 15, 2003 in the regular clerical cadre, in line with their Qualification and experience.
3. ' Petitioners have further stated that the Bank authorities have issued an other letter dated 25-9- 2008 with regard to absorption of foundation temporary and contract employee in clerical and non-clerical categories. In the last, the petitioners have stated that the action of respondent is illegal, mala fide, without jurisdiction and is against the law of natural justice.
4. ' In Constitutional Petition No,1233 of 2009, the petitioner has prayed as under:---
(a) That this honourable Court may graciously be pleased to direct the respondents Nos.1 and 2 to absorb the petitioner permanently into the service of the National Bank of Pakistan from September 15, 2003 as they have absorbed the other temporary Godown Chowkidars according to their own circular dated 1-8-2003 with all back-benefits and not to make any discrimination with the petitioner.
5. ' The petitioner in his petition has stated that he was appointed as Godown Chowkidar in the National Bank of Pakistan in the year 1995 and during his service he was given appointment order in the year 2000 and was put to work on important seats of Bank. Petitioner further states that they time and again approached the respondents and the names of temporary Godown Chowkidars were recommended by the Controlling Officer for absorption as permanent employees of the bank.
6. ' In Constitutional Petition No,154 of 2010, the petitioners have prayed for the following relief:---
(i) The honourable Court may be pleased to direct the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to absorb the petitioners permanently into the service of the NBP as from 15-9-2003, they have already absorbed the other temporary Godown Chowkidars according to their own circular dated 1-8-2003 with all hack benefits and not to make any discrimination with the petitioners.
7. The petitioners have mainly contended that they were appointed as Godown Chowkidar/Keepers and posted at various places and they were put to work on important seats in Bank. They have further stated that they have approached the respondents and so also the names of the petitioners were recommended by the Controlling Officer for absorption as permanent employees of the Bank.
8. ' Respondents have filed their objections and in their objections they have stated that the petitioners were appointed on the basis of seasonal requirement against Party's account and according to the Circul3r produced by the petitioners there is gap more than fifteen days between termination and re-engagement. They further stated that they are not employees of the bank, hence the hank is not liable to induct or absorb them as regular employees. In the last they stated that the petition is not maintainable and if the petitioners have any grievance they may knock door of proper forum and this Court has got no jurisdiction to entertain this petition. The respondents have further stated that the petitioners were appointed on account of borrowers/accounts holders and their salaries were to be paid through accounts of the borrowers. In all the three petitions, the stand taken by bank/respondents is same.
9. ' We have heard Messrs Ali Ahmed Khan Pathan and Aril Safdar Ghouri, Advocates appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Messrs Mushtaque Ahmed Kourejo, Standing Counsel and Muhammad Ali Dargahi for the respondents.
10. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that as the petitioners have worked as godown keepers and Chowkidars and have worked more than seven years and some of them have worked for about years but the respondents/bank have not regularized the services of the petitioners though they have earned vested tight to be regularized. Learned counsel for the petitioners further stated that the petitioners have experience of working in the bank and there is no complaint by respondents of any sort during entire period but discriminatory role has been played by the respondents/bank by not regularizing the services of the petitioners and though the authorities of Larkana range of the respondents bank have already recommended the cases of the petitioners for their regularization. Letters quoted above show that the respondents/ bank has itself taken steps to regular the services of temporary contractual/staff gap employees of the bank but discrimination has been done with the petitioners by the respondents/bank. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that under Article 25 of Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan all the citizens are equal and to be treated with equity.
11. ' On the other hand Messrs Mushtaque Ahmed Koureio, Standing Counsel, Abdul Rehman Bhutto and Muhammad Ali Dargahi counsel for the respondents contended that the petitioners though were appointed but they were appointed on purely contract and temporary basis hence their services cannot be treated as regular services under the administration of respondents. They further argued that if the petitioners have any grievance. They have to approach proper forum for their redressal and this Court has got no jurisdiction under Article 199 of Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. They further argued that they did not treat the petitioners as servant of the bank. They further argued that all the petitions may be dismissed as not maintainable under the law.
12. ' We have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, the petitioners were appointed as Chowkidars and Godown keeper on temporary stair gap basis. The respondents/bank has not denied the stand taken by the petitioners in their petition that they have not been appointed by the respondent/bank but the stand taken by the respondents/bank is that the petitioners were appointed on temporary basis and now they are not servants of the bank. If we consider that the petitioners are not servant of the hank as contended by the learned counsel for the respondents then the petitioners have right under Article 199 of Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan to seek remedy from this Court. It will be advantageous to reproduce Articles 4 and 25 of the Constitution which read as under:---
(4) Right of individuals to be dealt with in accordance with law, etc. (1) To enjoy the protection of law and to be treated in accordance with law is the inalienable right of every citizen, wherever he may be, and of every other person for the time being within Pakistan.
(25) Equality of citizens.--- (1) All citizens are equal before law and are entitled to equal protection of law.
(2) There shall be no discrimination on the basis of sex alone.
(3) Nothing in this Article shall, prevent the State from making any special provision for the protection of women and children.
13. ' In the case of Ikram Bari and 524 others v. National Bank of Pakistan through President and another. The honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan has held as under:--- "In our view, the conditions of three years length of service with not more than 15 days break between the consecutive appointments and termination of service imposed by the Tribunal for regularization of service of employees are quite reasonable and are also in line with the policy decisions taken by the Bank itself from time to time"
14. Islamic Welfare State is under obligation to establish a society, which is free from exploitation wherein social and economic justice is guaranteed to its citizens. The temporary Godown staff and the daily wages employees were continued in service of the Bank on payment of meager emoluments fixed by the Banc. We observe that in most of the cases of these employees, there were artificial breaks in their service so as to circumvant the provisions of the Labour Laws and the Rules of the Bank and to deny them the salaries and other service benefits of regular employees. It is duty of the State to secure the well-being of the people by raising their standards of living and by ensuring equitable adjustment of rights between employers and employees and provide for all citizens, within the available resources of the country, facilities for and adequate livelihood and reduce disparity in income and earnings of individuals. Similarly, Article 3 of the Constitution makes it obligatory upon the State to ensure the elimination of all forms of exploitation and the gradual fulfilment of the fundamental principle, from each according to his ability, to each according to his work. It is difficult to countenance the approach of the Bank that the temporary Godown staff and the daily wages employees should be continued to be governed on disgraceful terms and conditions of service for an indefinite period. As per section 24-A of the General Clauses Act 1897.
15. The National Bank was required to act reasonably, fairly and justly.
16. ' From the above discussion, we arc of the considered view that it is vested and Constitutional right of the petitioners who are working for so many years with the respondents/bank and the petitioners have given precious time of their age to respondents and they should be regularized/ absorbed. In the circumstances, we direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners within one month.
17. ' With the above observations, the petitions are allowed accordingly with no order as to costs.