' Muhammad Anwar Hussain Chauhan, ex-Sub-Inspector Co-operative Societies, Bahawalpur, has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunal Act, 1974, against the orders of Deputy Registrar Co-operative Societies Bahawalpur No, 2701-4, dated 31st July, 1983 and Registrar Co-operative Societies Punjab, Lahore No, Res/EA-V/Appeal/2105 dated 16th February, 1984 and No, S.O. (E) 2-22/83-III, dated 19th June, 1984 issued by Secretary Co-operative Department, Punjab, Lahore. He has impleaded the Province of Punjab, Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Co- operative Department, Lahore, Registrar Co-operative Societies Punjab, Lahore and the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bahawalpur, as respondents.
2. By virtue of this appeal he has prayed that all the impugned orders be set aside and he may be reinstated in service:
3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant who was Sub-Inspector Co-operative Societies, Kulab District Bahawalpur, was proceeded against under the Punjab Civil Servants (E & D) Rules, 1975, for wilful absence from duty from 16th April, 1983 to 7th May, 1983. A show-cause notice was issued to the appellant and the respondent No, 4 removed the appellant from service vide his order dated 31st July, 1983. Aggrieved against the said order the appellant filed appeal before the Registrar, Co-operative Societies Punjab, Lahore. On examination of the record it was observed that the medical certificate for the absence from 16th April, 1983 to 22nd April, 1983, was obtained by the appellant on 16th April 1983 and similarly the medical certificate from 23rd April, 1983 to 7th May, 198 was obtained by him on 23rd April, 1983, but the leave applications for the period from 16th April, 1983 to 22nd April, 1983 and 23rd April,' 1983 to 7th May, 1983 were received in the Office of Inspector, Co-operative Societies Ahmadpur East on 8th May, 1983, after the expiry of leave and appellant failed to submit applications to the Inspector Co-operative Societies Ahmadpur East on 16th April, 1983 to 23rd April, 1983. The appellant was awarded penalties of Censure and stoppage of one increment earlier for misconduct on account of wilful absence from duty but later on, as he repeated the same conduct, his case was taken up and he was removed from service as his appointment was temporary and he was liable to be terminated without any notice. Hence this appeal.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned District Attorney assisted by the representative of the Department and have perused the record of this case carefully with their assistance.
5. Learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant submitted his leave applications to the competent authority quite in time and duly supported by the medical certificates and the denial of medical leave was arbitrary and without any authority. According to the learned counsel for the appellant the authorities have committed wrong in concluding that the leave applications were intehtionally sent late. Whereas the same were received by them before the expiry of leave periods. It has been further argued that the respondent No, 4 has committed an error of fact and law by alleging that the medical certificate were issued by the incompetent authority as his first medical certificate for the period 16th April, 1983 to 22nd April, 1983 was issued by the privter practitioner but countersigned by Medical Officer, Ahmadpur East and the second certificate for the period 23rd April, 1983 to 7th May, 1983, was issued by a Medical Officer B. V.
Hospital Bahawalpur, as the appellant had to come from Ahmadpur East to Bahawalpur. It has been vehemently argued that the impugned orders had been issued without any formal enquiry and in violation of relevant provisions.
6. On the other hand learned District Attorney has submitted that the appellant has no case for agitating any of the grounds made in the appeal for the reason liable for termination without assigning any reason. It was further submitted that the appellant was previously charge-sheeted for misconduct and a regular inquiry was held and as a result of inquiry he was awarded punishment of censure and stoppage of one annual increment falling due on 1st February, 1981, as such his service record was unsatisfactory and the competent authority was fully competent to terminate his service as according to the terms and conditions of his services, he could be discharged from service without assigning any reason.
7. I have given my anxious thought to the arguments advanced by the parties and first of all would refer to the appointment order of the appellant which is placed on file. This appointment order of the appellant reveals that his appointment was purely on temporary/ad-hoc basis, which could be terminated at any time without assigning any reason. This order has been passed on 10th May, 1978,: and the appellant had accepted the conditions so laid down in the said order. However, to afford him an opportunity he was proceeded under the Efficiency and Discipline Rules. 1975, and as a result thereof his services were terminated after giving personal hearing on 9th July, 1983 by the authority. I have also gone into the merits of the case and find that all the leave applications submitted by the appellant were submitted when the said leave so applied, had expired. It would be clear from this established fact that the appellant deliberately posted his applications after the expiry of leave on both occasions to avoid the possibility of referring him to the Medical Superintendent Bahawalpur for second medical check up. I have looked into the medical certificate for leave from 16th April, 1983 to 22nd April, 1983 bears countersignatures of Medical Officer Tehsil Hqrs. Hospital but it was despatched to the Department on the expiry of leave. Second medical certificate for leave from 23rd April, 1983 to 7th May, 1983, was from a private practitioner whose place of practice was not indicated. Both the certificates were neither on proper form nor obtained properly from the authorised Medical Superintendent, therefore I am fortified to conclude that the leave was without any sanction of the proper authority.
8. In view of the above I do not find any merit in this appeal which is dismissed accordingly.