Syed Arshad Ali, Member--The appellant above-named being. aggrieved and dissatisfied assailed the impugned order issued vide No, 1418/Q/188 dated 16.01.2013 whereby service of R-191413 Sanitar Worker Rizwana Shamim was dispensed with. The appellant file departmental appeal for reinstatement in service vide appeal dated 7.01.2013 followed by few reminders. The departmental appeal was rejected vide letter No, 3800/Prosecution/355/2013 dated 15.02.2012. The appellant then filed Const. Petition # D-422 of 2013 in the Hon'ble High of Sindh Hyderabad Circuit, which was remitted Tribunal in the light of the principles enunciated by the lon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment dated 05.01.2015 passed in Civil Review Petition # 193 of 2013 etc (Azhar Ali Baloch v.
Province of Sindh & others) for its decision on merits. The appellant amended its title under Section-4 of the Service Tribunal Act 1973 as amended upto date praying that impugned order dated 16.01.2013 be set aside and the appellant be reinstated.
2. The factual position as per memo of appeal is that the appellant was appointed as Sanitary Worker in Pakistan Rangers on 03.01.2009. She subsequently became Incharge of Thar Rangers Families Welfare Centre, Hali Road, Hyderabad. She completed the courses of cutting, embroidery, stitching, dough crafting and painting etc. The superiors had been showing satisfaction and approval of her work.
3. The appellant was serving as Instructor in Thar Rangers Families Welfare Centre, Hyderabad with devotion and punctuality and to the full satisfaction of superiors. On 08.12.2012, the appellant had received' an explanation letter from Headquarters, Thar Rangers, Hali Road, Hyderabad that the appellant seemed to have lost interest in her work resultantly, the assignment given to the appellant had not been accomplished well in time. The notice of such laxity on the part of appellant had been taken by the authorities had been asked to take her work seriously, else the disciplinary proceedings may be initiated. Thereafter, the service of the appellant was dispensed with. The appellant preferred departmental appeal which was rejected, hence this appeal.
4. The respondents in parawise comments submitted that appellant was enrolled in Pakistan Rangers (Sindh) as sanitary worker on 13.01.2010. Her service was dispensed with by the Sector Commander Thar Rangers on 16.01.2013 under the provisions of Rule-13(2) of Pakistan Rangers Recruitment Rules 1968 due to unsatisfactory performance during her probationary period.
Rule-13 of Pakistan Rangers Recruitment Rules, 1968 is reproduced hereunder as:- "13. PROBATION --(1) A person appointed to a rank in the Force to which these rules apply against a permanent vacancy shall remain on probation for a period, of two years if appointed by initial recruitment and for a period of one year if appointed otherwise.
(2) If the work or conduct of a member of the Force during the period of probation, has in the opinion of the appointing authority not been satisfactory, the appointing authority, may, notwithstanding that the period of probation has not expired dispense with his services if he was appointed initial recruitment and if he was appointed otherwise, revert him to his initial rank or if there be no such rank dispense with his services
(3) On completion of the period of probation of a member of the Force, the appointing authority may, subject to the provisions of sub rule (3) confirm him in his appointment or if his work or conduct has. in the opinion of the appointing authority not been satisfactory.
(a) In case he has been appointed by initial recruitment dispense with his service, or
(b) In case he has been appointed otherwise revert him to his former rank if there be no such rank, dispense with his service; or
(c) Extend the period of probation by a period not exceeding two years in all and during or on the expiry of such period pass such orders as it could have passed during or on the expiry of the initial probationary period."
6. In via of the express provision of Rule-13 with regard to dispensing with service within probationary period on performance deemed as unsatisfactory, the instant appeal merits no consideration, for the respondents dispensed with her service within the period of probation as provided in the rule ibid. The appeal, is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.
7. Parties be informed accordingly.