SYED HASAN AZHAR RIZVI, J .----By this order I intend to dispose of following C.MAs:-
(1) C.M.A. No.10244/2020 filed by the plaintif f under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151, C.P.C. to restrain the defendants, their officers, attorneys, representatives or anybody acting on their behalf from taking any adverse action against the plaintif f on the basis of alleged charge of tempering / bogus Matric Certificate, till final adjudication of this suit.
(2) C.M.A. No.12096/2020 filed by the plaintif f under Section 151, C.P.C. to pass order for the forensic examination of the original matric certificate of the plaintif f in order to ascertain the alleged tempering in the year of birth.
2. Plaintif f was inducted as Apprentice Mechanic in defendant No.2 pursuant to an advertisement published in various leading newspapers in May / June, 1989. Photocopy of publication is enclosed at page-31 with the plaint.
As per advertisement maximum age limit for induction was 25 years whereas at the time of applying for aforementioned post the plaintif f was about 19 years and 03 months. After completing 03 years apprenticeship, the plaintif f was inducted as Technician with the defendant No.2 vide appointment letter dated 30.09.1993. Copy of the same is enclosed at page-29 with the plaint. Plaintif f had to join his service from 05.08.1993 and almost served 27 years for the PIA / respondent No.2 and presently serving as Deputy Chief Engineer , Engine Overhaul Planning with the defendant No.2. Learned counsel for the plaintif f states that plaintif f is well known, among his contemporaries for his competence, professionalism, integrity and honesty . Plaintif f at the time of induction in service submitted his educational documents including his Matric Certificate to the defendant. After about 23 years of the plaintif f's service with the defendant No.2, the defendant No.4 issued a letter dated 18.04.2016 to the plaintif f. Copy thereof is enclosed at page-35 with the plaint. Plaintif f appeared along with his original Matric Certificate, that was seen and returned on 27.04.2016. However , on 14.06.2016 plaintif f was served with the show- cause notice by the defendant No.4 containing allegation that Board of Secondary Education, Karachi has certified that the date of birth of the plaintif f in his Matric Certificate was found tempered. Learned counsel for the plaintif f urged that the plaintif f before submitting his reply to the show cause notice sought verification of his Matric Certificate from the Board of Secondary Education, Karachi by filing an application dated 16.06.2016 (copy thereof is enclosed at page-41 with the plaint). Matriculation Certificate of the plaintif f was verified by the Board of Secondary Education, Karachi through a letter dated 17.06.2016. Copy thereof is enclosed at page-43 with the plaint. It is specifically stated in that said letter of the Board of Secondary Educatio n, Karachi that "After seeing the original Certificate, the same was not found with any tempering on it", Plaintif f filed Suit No.1951/2016 for declaration and permanent injunction against the defendants in this Court. Copy of the same is enclosed as annexure "G" at page-69 with the plaint. This Court was pleased to grant interim restraining order against the defendants. Plaintif f replied the show-cause notice on 21.06.2016 issued for personal hearing was issued by the defendants to the plaintif f. Copy thereof is enclosed at page-91 with the plaint. Subsequent thereof on 24.02.2017 the defendant No.4 issued a letter to the plaintif f directing him to withdraw Suit No.1951/2016 unconditionally thereafter , the Management of the defendant will decide to consider withdrawal of the show cause notice dated 14.06.2016 issued to the plaintif f. Copy of that letter is enclosed at page-93 with the plaint. Learned counsel for the plaintif f states that plaintif f withdrew afore said suit. Photocopy of the certified copy of the order dated 08.03.2017 is enclosed at page-99 with the plaint. Defendant No.4 issued letter dated 25.05. 2017 whereby the plaintif f was exonerated from the charges. Copy of the said letter is enclosed as annexure "G/5" at page-101 with the plaint. On 07.02.2019 the plaintif f was promoted to the post of the Deputy Chief Engineer as per letter enclosed as annexure "H" at page-103.
3. Present suit was filed when leave application of the plaintif f was rejected on or about 24.09.2020 for the reason that his Matric Certificate again found tempered without any new evidence. Copy of that letter is enclosed as annexure "H/3" at page-121 with the plaint. Plaintif f filed present suit against the defendants and has obtained interim injunctive order on 12.10.2020, which is still holding field. Learned counsel for the plaintif f submits that the defendants Nos.2 to 5 did not file written statement or any counter affidavit to the injunction application bearing C.M.A. No.10244/2020 but a separate statement along with certain documents including photocopy of show cause notice dated 11.11.2020. Defendant No.6 Board of Secondary Education, Karachi filed counter affidavit to the injunction application whereby admitted contents of letter No.BSE/CER T/VER/6876/2016, dated 12.05.2016 (enclosed at page-39 with the plaint) and letter No.BSE/CER T/VER/6876/2016, dated 17.06.2016 (enclosed at page-43 with the plaint). Both letters were issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Karachi confirming therein that there is no tempering in the Matric Certificate of the plaintif f. The only issue was that in the tabulation register maintained by the defendant No.6 date of birth of the plaintif f is mentioned as 18.03.1971 instead of 18.03.1970.
Learned counsel for the plaintif f has placed reliance upon 2020 PLC (C.S.) 483 and 2016 PLC 335. Learned counsel for the plaintif f further submits that the plaintif f has a good prima facie case and balance of convenience also lies in his favour as the defendants Nos.2 to 5 after about 27 years are challenging genuineness of the Matric Certificate of the plaintif f whereas in 2017 the genuineness of the same Matric Certificate was verified from the Board of Secondary Education, Karachi and on the basis of the reports / letters issued by the defendant No.6 the plaintif f was exonerated from the charg es, referred to above and was promoted to the post of Deputy Chief Engineer in 2019.
4. Learned counsel for the defendants Nos.2 to 5 did not file any counter affidavit to the pending applications and even no written statement has been filed by the defendants Nos.2 to 5 till this date. However , on perusal of the record it appears that statement in writing was filed on 24.11.2020. Pursuant to the order dated 09.11.2020 certain documents were enclosed with the defendant No.2's statement including the correspondence in between the plaintif f and defendants Nos.2 to 5. All such documents are showing that date of birth of the plaintif f as mentioned in the register of birth maintained by the Municipal Corporation, Multan is 18.03.1970. Copy of the same is enclosed at page-53 with the statement of the defendant No.2. Form "B" issued on 14.07.1976 by the Ministry of Interior under Registration Act, 1972 ' (available at page-55) is also showing same date of birth of the plaintif f i.e. 18.03.1970. Same date of birth of the plaintif f is also mentioned in the Passport (available at page-61) and CNIC (available at page-65) as well as Domicile (available at page-69) of the plaintif f. Letter dated 12.05.2016 of the Board of Secondary Education, Karachi enclosed at page-73 with the statement of the defendant No.2 whereby it is certified that particulars / details mentioned in the Matric Certificate of the plaintif f were found as per record and the date of birth of the plaintif f was mentione d in that letter as 18.03.1971. A very important document is letter of the defendant No.6 the Board of Secondary Education, Karachi dated 16.06.2016 enclosed as annexure "F" at page- 81 with the statement of the defendant No.2 wherein it is mentioned that "After seeing the original Certificate, the same was not found with any tempering on it".
5. Learned counsel for the defendants Nos.2 to 5 while emphasizes on the contents of the show cause notice issued to the plaintif f and the reply of the plaintif f, it is submitted that the reply of the plaintif f was found satisfactory to the management and no interference of the Court is required. He has relied upon the following case laws:-
1. Muhammad Yousaf Khan v . Habib Bank Limited and others 2004 SCMR 149 .
2. Khalid Mahmood Ch. and others v . Government of the Punjab 2002 SCMR 805 .
3. Saeed Ahmad and others v . Chairman O.G.D.C.L. and others 2019 PLC 277 (SB).
4. Saadullah v . Albaraka Bank 2019 PLC (C.S.) 940.
5. Messrs Serwat Aziz v . Sindh Bank Limited 2019 PLC (C.S.) 975.
6. Premier Financial Services (Pvt.) Ltd. v . SECP 2015 CLD 1852 .
7. Naweed Akhtar Cheema v . Chairperson, TEVET A and others, 201 1 PLC (C.S.) 803 (SB).
8. Naveed Alam Zubairi v . Federation of Pakistan, 2019 PLC (C.S.) Note 34(b) (SB).
9. Saed Liaquat Naqvi v . Azad Government of Jammu and Kashmir 2018 PLC (C.S.) Note 152.
10. Amir Shahbaz v . Government of N. W .F.P. and others 2004 SCMR 492 (SC).
11. Deputy District Of ficer (Revenue), Kasur and another v . Muhammad Munir Sajid 2013 SCMR 279 .
12. Kaloo Khan and others v . O.G.D.C.L. and others 2019 PLC (C.S.) 519 (SB).
13. Habib Bank Limited v . Manzoor Hussain 1994 PLC 373 High Court Lahore.
6. Defendant No.6 filed written statement in this suit wherein preliminary objections with regard to the maintainability of present suit has been raised but the defendant No.6 did not challenge authenticity and / or genuineness of the Matric Certificate issued to the plaintif f. Only objection raised in the written statement of the defendant No.6 is that according to tabulation register of the Board of Secondary Education, Karachi date of birth of the plaintif f is 18.03.1971. Learned counsel for the defendant No.6 submitted that neither any inadvertent error has been occurred nor any mistake has been admitted by the defendant while entering the date of birth of the plaintif f in their record.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties, 'perused material available on record as well as case laws with their assistance.
8. It is undeniable fact that the plaintif f applied pursuant to the advertisement, all the relevant documents / testimonials including Matric Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Karachi provided by the plaintif f to the defendant No.6 containing date of birth of the plaintif f as 18.03.1970. Plaintif f obtained Matric Certificate prior to applying for the job and got his job of Technician with the defendant No.2. All the documents relating to his date of birth maintained by the various government functionaries like 'Register of Birth', maintained by the Municipal Corporation, Multan, Form "B" issued on 14.07.1976 by the Ministry of Interior under Registration Act, 1972, the Passport and CNIC of the plaintif f as well as his Domicile, referred to above, contained same date of birth of the plaintif f, which has been show n in the Matric Certificate i.e. 18.03,1970. If there is any error in the date of birth of the plaintif f, the same is on the part of the officials of Board of Secondary Education, Karachi / defendant No.6. For the sake of argument it is assumed that the date of birth of the plaintif f is 18.03.1971 then it will be beneficial for the plaintif f and he will get benefit of one year more in his service. Mostly the employees challenged their date of birth at the verge of their retirement on the ground that it was wrongly mentioned in the official record but in the present case plaintif f has not challenged his date of birth wrongly main tained by the defendant No.6 in the tabulation register , that appears to be a mistake / error committed by the official of the defendant No.6, who noted wrong date of birth of the plaintif f in the Tabulation Register , that record is contrary to the record of the Board of Secondary Education, Karachi when the defendant No.6 itself issued Matric Certificate on 21st September , 1986 to the plaintif f showing his date of birth as Eighteenth March, one thousand nine hundred seventy (18.03.1970). For about twenty seven (27) years no 'efforts were made by the defendant No.6 to rectify the error if same was occurred in September , 1986 when the Martic Certificate was issued to the plaintif f.
9. Correspondence made by the defenda nt No.6 with the defendants Nos.2 to 5 and the plaintif f is contrary and in conflict with the record maintained by the defendant No.6 to the extent of tabulation register . This fact for the first time surfaced by the defendant No.6 in 2020 whereas the plaintif f was issued Matric Certificate on 21.09.1986.
Defendants Nos.2 to 5 have failed to rebut, deny or challenge the averments of the memo. of plaint as well as affidavits in support of the injunction application by filing any counter affidavit / written statement in the present case. It is a settled principle of law that if the averments / contents / facts are not denied, controvert or challenged, the same shall be deemed to have been admitted. If any authority is need the reference may be made to the case of Haji Abdul Sattar and others v. Mst. Mehnaz and others (2020 MLD 896), the case of Usman Khan v. Mst.
Shehla Gul and others (2020 CLC 910) and Wajid Ali and another v. The State and another (2020 YLR Note 113). Plaintif f has established a prima facie case and balance of convenience is also lies in his favour and he shall suffer irreparable loss if injunction application is not allowed.
10. In view of above circumstances, injunction application bearing C.M.A. No.10244/2020 is allowed. Interim order already passed is hereby confirmed.
11. With regard to the C.M.A. No.12096/2020 is concerned there is no need for any forensic examination of the original matric certificate of the plaintif f as the defendant No.6 has not challenged the authenticity and genuineness of the same. Claim of the defendant No.6 is only to the extent that the date of birth of the plaintif f is mentioned in their tabulation register as 18.03.1971 instead of 18.03.1970. As such C.M.A. No.12096/2020 is hereby dismissed accordingly .