ZAHEER-UD-DIN KAKAR, (CHAIRMAN).--- Through this single judgment, we intend to dispose of Service Appeals Nos.427 to 437 of 2014 and 465, 466, 468 to 470, 472, 473, 480 and 481 of 2014 as identical questions of law and facts are involved in above titled service appeals. In the above titled service appeals, filed under section 4 of the Balochistan Service Tribunal Act, 1974 the appellants have prayed for the following relief:--- "It is, therefore, accordingly prayed that such unfair practice, condemning appellants contrary to the law and fact be declared as illegal and contrary to the law and impugned order dated 24-4- 2014, may kindly be set aside and the appellants be restored/reinstated in service from the date of termination i,e, 24-4-2014, with all benefits in the interest of equity, fair play and natural justice."
2. Precisely stating the facts of the cases are that on the recommendation of Departmental Selection Committee the respondent_ No,2 had appointed the appellants in Bolan Medical College against the posts of Projectnist (B-8), Security Guard (B-4), Dark Room Assistant Lab Assistant (B- 6), Mali (B-1), Sweeper (B-1), Junior Clerk Bearer (BS-1), Assistant Computer Operator (B-12), Dental Technician (B-12), T.V. Technician (B-8), Cataloguer Classifier (B-14) in the years 2012 and 2013 (herein-after "the said posts"). Subsequently, on the recommendations of the Inquiry Committee their appointment orders were cancelled vide impugned order dated 24-4-2014, on the ground that their appointments were illegal and void ab initio, being against the prescribed rules.
3. The appellants being aggrieved of the impugned order made representations, which remained unturned. Lastly, while finding no other way out they approached this Tribunal by filing the instant appeals.
4. The respondents contested the appeals on legal and factual grounds by filing their Para-wise comments.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as the learned Additional Advocate- General, Balochistan and perused the record with their assistance.
6. Messrs Taj Muhammad Mengal and Muhammad Ali Kanrani, learned counsel for the appellants contended that the appellants have been appointed on the recommendation of the Departmental Selection Committee after fulfilling all the requirements under the law and in pursuance of their appointment orders they submitted their joining reports and started their duties with utmost full satisfaction of their superiors and left no stone unturned in discharging their duties and the respondents without adopting proper procedure the services of the appellants were dispensed with vide impugned order dated 24-4-2014. It has been further contended that impugned order has been passed arbitrarily, without any explanation, show-cause notice and without adopting the proper procedure as laid down under the law (BEEDA). Finally, the learned counsel for appellants prayed for reinstatement of the appellants in service and setting aside of the impugned order.
7. On the other hand Mr. Muhammad Saleem Baloch, learned Additional Advocate-General, vehemently opposed the contention raised by the counsel for appellants and contended that the said appointments were made on the basis 'of favoritism, nepotism, influence, illegally and without observing the applicable Rules and requisite formalities.
8. From perusal of the record it transpires that the Government of Balochistan Health Department constituted an. Inquiry Committee vide Notification No,SO-Gen(H)/Inquiry/2014 dated 13-1-2014, with direction to conduct inquiry into the appointments made against the said posts in Bolan Medical College, Quetta and to fix the responsibility against the officers involved in making illegal appointments. The Inquiry Committee started its proceedings on 17-1-2014, and submitted detailed report with recommendations on 10-3-2014. Thereafter, on the basis of findings and recommendations of the Inquiry Committee, the respondent No,1 cancelled all the appointment orders vide impugned order dated 24-4-2014.
9. It is evident from the inquiry report submitted by the Additional Secretary, Health Department, Government of Balochistan that the persons who were appointed have been recommended and removed from service without issuance of any show cause/inquiry and personal hearing which is illegal and contrary to the provisions of law as well as natural justice and equity.
10. If we look into the brief facts of the appeals, the relief claimed therein is identical. In fact the appellants have one voice claimed their reinstatement in service. The perusal of record shows that their appointments have been made in the months of February, March, April, August and October, 2012 and April, June and November, 2013, and the said appointments have been cancelled on the basis of inquiry conducted by the Health Department on the plea that these were illegal appointments made thereof by the Ex-Principals Bolan Medical College (Professor Dr.Shahnaz Naseer Baloch and Professor Dr.Muhammad Aslant Baloch). The perusal of available record shows that appointment orders of the appellants have been cancelled without adhering the provisions of the Balochistan Employees Efficiency and Discipline Act, 2013. We are fully convinced that the appellants were totally condemned unheard and were made to suffer for illegality committed by the Government/Department itself.
11. From perusal of the record it appears that the principle of natural justice and audi alteram partem has grossly been violated. This principle was endorsed by the Hon'able Supreme Court in case of Mst. Maryam Yunus v. Director of Education PLD 1990 SC 666(e) and the non-issuance of notice was held could be ignored provided a fair opportunity of representing his point of view had been given to the civil servant at some stage or the other. In the appeals in hand no such opportunity was given at any stage before cancelling the appointment orders of the appellant.
12. Coming to the merits of the grounds of cancellation of the appointment orders of the appellants, it was deprecated by the Hon`ble Supreme Court in Secretary to Government of N.- W.F.P. Zakat/Social Welfare Department, Peshawar v. Sadullah Khan 1996 SCMR 413 where, a Full Bench cognizant of similar circumstances has observed that the department having itself appointed civil servant in violation of rules could not be allowed subsequently to turn around and take benefit of its own lapses in order to terminate the services of a civil servant. The Department having itself committed irregularity and having itself violated the prescribed procedure cannot punish the civil servant for its own misdeeds and after the lapse of a considerable time during which the civil servant has satisfactorily performed his duties.
13. In the case of Syed Sikandar Ali Shah v. Auditor-General of Pakistan 2002 SCMR 1124 a Full Bench of the Hon'ble apex Court had taken serious note of such removals from service by the Government. The Hon'ble Court further observed that even if some case appears to be of political influence, the competent authority should be hold enough to face such influence. It was further remarked that "Obeying capricious and arbitrary directions of political bosses without raising slightest protest by Competent Authority depicts a cowardly and condemnable trend".
14. Numerous civil appeals numbering ten were heard by the Hon'ble apex Court and decided on 28-5-2002 involving the same question of appointments being against the prescribed procedure.
Such appeals were accepted and the above reason for removal from service was not allowed to be sustained (Civil Appeal No,616 of 2000 and others) Nisar and 9 others v. Government of N.-W.E.P.
And others decided on 28-5-2002.
15. In the case of Province of Punjab v. Zulfiqar Ali 2005 PLC (C.S.) 1165 the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has observed that:--- "It may be noted that these rules contemplate an action against an employee who is guilty for the breach. Of good service order, in discipline, misconduct etc. But it does not contain any provision on the basis of which appointment of an employee can be cancelled on the ground that it has been made illegally. In other words in such-like situations instead of taking action against an appointee it is appropriate if an action is taken against the Appointing Authority who apparently committed a misconduct by making such appointment."
' In the case of Pakistan International Air Lines Corporation through Chairman and others v.
Shehzad Farooq Malik and others 2004 SCMR 158 the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that:--- "vested rights would accrue to employee, who after appointment was confirmed in service --- such right of employee could not be interfered with only on the ground that he had been irregularly appointed by the corporation, unless there were other allegations against him in view of locus poenitentiae."
16. In view of the above circumstances, the matter is remanded to the respondents Nos.1 and 2 for holding de novo proceedings against the appellants in accordance with law/rules (BEEDA) and decide the matter preferably within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Impugned order dated 24-4-2014, is set aside to the entent of appellants and they are directed to be reinstated in service without back-benefits to face the inquiry.
' Parties are informed accordingly.