' The facts necessary for the disposal of this Constitutional Petition are that the petitioner was appointed as Training Officer (General) in the Overseas Pakistan Foundation (respondent No, I). His services were terminated on 13th September, 1983 on the ground that the post held by him had been abolished in the budget for the year 1983-84.
2. The order terminating the services of the petitioners has been challenged through this petition on the ground that it is illegal, passed without legal authority, unjust, mala fide and arbitrary. Report and parawise comments were called from the respondents. They have seriously challenged the maintainability of the petition. According to them the writ being for enforcement of individual rights or for redress of individual grievance arising out of contratual relations is not maintainable. It is further stated that the right urged for enforcement through the writ is not based on any Constitutional, statutory or legal provisions providing any safeguard or guarantee to the petitioner to be removed from service in a given manner, therefore, there is no legal right vesting in him for the enforcement of any public duty/legal duty by the respondents.
3. The petitioner was holding an ordinary employment as Training Officer (General) as compared to a public office such as corporate or1 elective office or municipal position, therefore, the relief claimed by him cannot be granted. The petitioner's terms and conditions of service provided that his services could be terminated with one month's notice o pay in lieu there of and since his services have been terminated in accordance with his terms and conditions he should have no grievance.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. A perusal of the appointment letter shows that the services of the petitioner could be terminated on one month's notice or one month's pay in lieu thereof. The respondents is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1913. The Service of the petitioner was of a contractual nature. His services have been terminated in accordance with his terms and conditions. If at all, he feels aggrieved he may sue for damages but he cannot force himself on the respondents against their will. Since this is a contratual matter, proceedings under Article 9 of the Provisional Constitutional Order, 1981 for the purpose of enforcement of contractual obligations and liabilities cannot be initiated.
5. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed in limine.