IJAZ AHMED CHAUDHRY, J. ~ Through this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 8th February, 2010 passed by the Senior Medical Officer, Rural Health Centre, Lalian, through which the petitioner has been restrained from continuing his duty as Laboratory Technician at Rural Health Centre, Lalian.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Laboratory Technician on contract basis for a period of one year in the Health Department on 23.1.2009 and was posted at Rural Health Centre, Lalian. Dr. Ijaz Haider, respondent No. 3 is Senior Medical Officer, at Rural Health Centre, Lalian District Chiniot and employees of Rural Health Centre, Lalian have made certain complaints against him that he was misusing his authority and inquiry was conducted by th Executive District Officer, in which allegations were found correct and the matter was reported to the Secretary Health. Then a complaint was filed by the D.P.O, against the said doctor on which an inquiry was conducted by the D.C.O., Jhang and he also recommended for departmental action against respondent No. 3 as the allegations against him regarding misuse of powers stood proved, It is claimed by the petitioner that as the petitioner had also moved an application against respondent No. 3 and made statement against him, so he became annoyed and salary of the petitioner was stopped. The petitioner was constrained to i.e Writ Petition No. 14590 of 2009 in this Court which was disposed of on 6th November, 2009 after perusal of the impugned order dated 14.7.2009 and while considering the documentary evidence produced by the petitioner, the E.D.O.
Health, Jhang was directed to pay the salaries to the petitioner and moreover, Secretary Health was directed for taking action against Dr. Ijaz Haider against whom in the two inquires conducted by two different forums, the allegations were proved.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that due to this grievance impugned order dated 8th February, 2010 in the present case has been passed through which the petitioner has been restrained from performing his duty by Dr. Ijaz Haider, Senior Medical Officer, Rural Health Centre, Lalian. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that respondent No. 3 has passed this order with mala i.e intention and ulterior motives as the petitioner along with other employees had appeared against respondent No. 3 in both the inquiries which had been conducted regarding the mal-practices. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that services of all the contract employees have been regularized by the Chief Minister Punjab in relaxation of rules and respondents had no authority to relieve the petitioner and they were bound to regularize the services of the petitioner but the respondents due to the background which has been discussed above have regularized the services of all the employees except the petitioner, who was restrained to perform his duties. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that the order is illegal and respondent No. 3 is responsible to send the name of the petitioner as well showing him as contract employee but he had failed to perform his duty and due to this reason his name did not surface in the Notification dated 31st December, 2009 in which all the employees who were similarly placed with the petitioner were regularized, It is next contended that respondent No. 3 had no authority to block the name of the petitioner as the petitioner had provided documents to him thrice, i.e. In December, 2009, 2nd January, 2010 and 31st January, 2010 and lame excuse has been made that the petitioner had not supplied documents for regularization of his services.
4. The learned A.A.G, on the other hand opposes this writ petition on the ground that as the petitioner had failed to provide documents to the respondent, his services could not be regularized.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the documents attached therewith. The petitioner admittedly was appointed by the Board constituted for appointment of employees on contract basis and the petitioner was qualified to be appointed as such. The petitioner joined Rural Health Centre, Lalian where respondent No. 3 is Senior Medical Officer and certain complaints had been filed against him with certain allegations that he was misusing his authority, who was indulged in mal-practices as well. The matter was enquired into by Executive District Officer (H), Chiniot who recommended for taking action against respondent No. 3 and sent the matter to Secretary Health Punjab, which is still pending before him. In the meanwhile, another application was moved by the D.P.O, whereupon inquiry was conducted by the D.C.O, and he also found that respondent No. 3, Senior Medical Officer, Lalian was involved in the said allegations. The statements have been given by the lower staff including the petitioner in support of the allegations and respondent No. 3 being annoyed stopped the salaries of the petitioner whereupon the petitioner was constrained to i.e Writ Petition No. 14590 of 2009, which was disposed of on 6.11.2009 after hearing learned counsel for both the parties with the following observations:- "It is not denied that petitioner has been appointed as Laboratory Technician for three years and he joined Rural Health Centre Lalian; it is also admitted that the petitioner moved written complaint against respondent No. 2 and levelled serious allegations that he is charging excess i.e from the patients at the time of operation and tests etc. And inquiry was conducted on 3.6.2009 and inquiry report shows that serious allegations levelled against respondent No. 2 has been proved. Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that vide letter dated 24.6.2009 D.C.O., Jhang had sent recommendations to the Secretary Health Government of Punjab for suspension of respondent No. 2 but no action so far has been taken against him and in retaliation the petitioner has been transferred from Rural Health Centre, Lalian to R.H.C. Ahmad Nagar, In the said circumstances this petition is accepted and order dated 14.7.2009 passed by respondent No. 1 is set aside as it has been passed by incompetent officer and also on some extraneous grounds because the allegations levelled by the petitioner against respondent No. 2 have been proved as per report submitted by D.C.O., Jhang. Even otherwise, there is no vacant post at Rural Health Centre, Ahmad Nagar as petitioner has been directed to receive the salary from R.H.C., Lalian. Executive District Officer Health, Jhang is directed to take action against respondent No. 2 while considering the recommendations of D.C. (Health), Jhang vide its letter dated 24.6.2009 and dispose of the said matter immediately."
6. The Government of the Punjab through Notification dated 14th October, 2009 has regularized the services of the employees in BS-1 to 15, recruited on contract basis under the provisions of the Contract Appointment Policy issued by the S&GAD in 2004 against the posts -presently held by them in various Government Department of the Punjab, with immediate effect. The petitioner being a contract employee was also entitled to be regularized as per said Notification but in violation of the said Notification his services were not regularized, vide Notification dated 31.12.2009, but through the impugned order dated 8th February, 2010 respondent No. 3 has restrained the petitioner to perform his duties.
7. The only condition for regularization of the contract employees was subject to verification of attested antecedents (Degrees, Qualifications, Diplomas, I.D. Card, Domicile and other allied documents). On the other hand, stand of the petitioner is that he had produced his documents before respondent No. 3 thrice but he neither placed the same on the record nor recommended the name of the petitioner for regularization of his services and showed him as contract employee, It is also significant to point out here, that there was ill-will between the petitioner and respondent No. 3 as the petitioner trod appeared as a witness when the inquiry was conducted against respondent No. 3 for commission of mal-practices. In the earlier Writ Petition No. 14590 of 2009 respondent No. 3 had also been found responsible for stoppage of the salaries of the petitioner and the said writ petition was accepted by this Court and salaries were directed to be paid to the petitioner. Today, Crl. Org. No. 175-W of 2010 is also fixed wherein it has been claimed that the salaries have not been paid to the petitioner. However, D.O. (H) has made statement that papers for payment of the salaries to the petitioner have already been submitted to the Account Officer, who has undertaken to make payment to the petitioner and the said Crl. Org. Has been disposed of accordingly.
8. The petitioner is being continuously harassed through interference in the performance of his duties as per allegations by respondent No. 3. There is some substance in the allegations as now respondent No. 3 has again deprived the petitioner from having been regularized with mala i.e intention and ulterior motives, who could not be discriminated as all the employees similarly placed were to be dealt with alike as provided under Articles 25 and 4 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.
9. For what has been discussed above, this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction accept this writ petition and set aside the order dated 8th February, 2010 by issuing direction to the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner and he shall be allowed to perform his duties.
10. Before parting from this order, I am constrained to observe that the case of respondent No. 3 has already been referred by the D.O. (H) and D.C.O, for taking action against him which is pending before the Secretary Health, Punjab, who is directed to dispose of the same in accordance with law at the earliest. The learned Law Officer shall ensure compliance of the said order.