' AMIR HANI MUSLIM, J.---This Petition for leave to Appeal is directed against the order dated 23-12- 2014, passed by the High Court of Sindh, Karachi, whereby the Constitutional Petition filed by the respondent No.1 was allowed.
2. The facts for adjudication of the Petition are that on 21-1-2010, the respondent No.1 was appointed as District General Manager on probation for a period of three months in National Commission for Human Development (NCHD), after fulfilling the codal formalities. The respondent No.1 was posted at Khairpur and after evaluation of her services being satisfactory, she was confirmed in the service of the petitioner w.e.f. 30-3-2010. During her service with the NCHD, the respondent No.1 received an offer from the Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP) for her posting as Divisional Director on deputation basis for three years on standard terms and conditions. The NCHD issued No Objection Certificate dated 20-10-2011 for her posting with the BISP on deputation.
3. The respondent No. 1 was relieved from her duties w.e.f. 27-8-2012, to join the Benazir Income Support Programme on deputation basis. The BISP issued Notification dated 15-9-2012 for posting of the respondent No.1 in her own pay and scale on deputation basis. However, by order dated Nil the NCHD terminated the services of the respondent No.1 a day after her relieving from the NCHD, which statedly was passed without knowledge of the respondent No.1 and without assigning any reason. The order of termination of services of the respondent No.1 was communicated to the BISP in the first week of October, 2013. The BISP relieved the respondent No.1 on the basis of the said order from her duties. Firstly, she filed Writ Petition for regularization of her services, which she withdrew on acquiring the knowledge of her termination and filed another Constitutional Petition before the High Court of Sindh, Karachi, with the following prayers:-
(a) To declare that the order dated (Nil) (annexure 'G) terminating the services of petitioner, a confirmed employee, as illegal, mala fide, in complete violation of principles of natural justice, as such, without jurisdiction and of no legal effect.
(b) To direct the respondents to restore the services of petitioner on the same position from which she was relieved on 27-8-2012 on deputation to BISP.
(c) To direct the respondents Nos.) and 2 to pay the salary(ies) of petitioner from October 2013 onward, when she was relieved from BISP.
(d) To direct the respondents to place the name of petitioner in the list of regular employees in structural changes being made in the department of respondent No.] by which employees of NCHD will acquire status of Government Employees.
(e) To award cost of the petition to grant any other relief the(sic.) circumstances of this case.
4. The learned High Court, allowed the Writ Petition of the respondent No.1 in the following terms:- "For the reasons as stated, we allow this petition and set aside the impugned termination order dated 27-8-2012, with direction to respondent No.1 to provide if they still wish to take any action, a fair opportunity of hearing to the petitioner to defend her case strictly in accordance with law. The petitioner consequently would get all the back benefits/salaries in accordance with law and as per the prevailing rules and procedures of the respondents."
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the Writ Petition filed by the respondent No.1 before the High Court was not maintainable. He next contended that the service regulations of the NCHD are non-statutory, therefore, the learned High Court did not have jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the matters relating to the terms and conditions of employees of NCHD as the employees of the NCHD are governed by the Rule of 'Master and Servant' ; that the impugned judgment is liable to be set aside on this score alone.
6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 has contended that the services of the respondent No.1 were terminated without assigning any reason, although she had completed her probationary period satisfactorily. The order of termination was passed without issuance of any show-cause and or holding of regular inquiry, as mandated by Rule 12.02 of the Employees' Service Rules, 2006, of NCHD, therefore, the very termination of the respondent No.1 was illegal. In support of his contentions, the learned Counsel has relied on the case of Pakistan Defence Officer's Housing Authority v. Lt. Col. Jawaid Ahmed (2013 SCM R 1707). He next contended that the respondent No. 1 was not communicated the order of her termination for a long time and she remained unaware about termination of her services.
7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. Admittedly, the respondent No.1 was appointed as District General Manager on probation for a period of three months and was confirmed as such in service of NCHD on successful completion of probationary period. Her services were requisitioned by the BISP on deputation basis and the NCHD issued NOC for her appointment on deputation with the BISP and also relieved her to join the BISP. While she was serving with the BISP on deputation basis, the NCHD terminated her services without assigning any reason and issuance of show-cause notice and or holding of regular inquiry, which order was not sustainable at law, being passed at the back of the respondent No.1.
8. The NCHD was created through National Commission For Human Development Ordinance (No.XXIX) of 2002. Section 22 of the Ordinance confers the power upon the Commission for framing rules for determination of salaries and allowances and other benefits of the members of the staff of the Commission. The NCHD has framed its services Rules which are called Employees' Service Rules, 2006. Rule 12.02 of the said Rules provides: "(1) In case of gross misconduct and/or serious performance concerned, the appointing authority may terminate the services of any employee by giving one-month notice or one month salary in lieu of notice.
(2) Department head/GM HDSUs will inform the Director Human Resources whenever they wish to terminate an employee. All terminations should be in line with NCHD 's Disciplinary Policy. To ensure that all legal obligations are fulfilled, only Director Human Resources is authorized to issue termination order."
9. The termination of the respondent No.1 was in complete disregard of the above procedure and without fulfilling the legal obligations. Therefore, the letter issued by the petitioners terminating the services of the respondent No. 1 was unwarranted and not sustainable at law.
10. So far as the question of maintainability of the Writ Petition filed by the respondent No.1 is concerned, the principle enunciated in the case of Pakistan Defence Officers's Housing Authority (supra) is fully applicable to the case in hand, as the order terminating the services of the respondent No.1 was in complete disregard of the procedural requirements as provided in Rule 12.02 of the Rules of 2006 and violative of the principles of natural justice.
11. The impugned judgment passed by the learned High Court is in consonance with the principles laid own by this Court in the case of Pakistan Defence Officers's Housing Authority (supra) to which no exception can be taken. Therefore, we do not find any merit in this Petition, which is dismissed and leave to Appeal is refused.