1. ' Through the present appeal, appellant assailed the impugned order No, 32-35, dated 10-1-1988 and subsequent order issued by respondent No, 5 vide which respondent No, 6 and then respondent No, 7 was employed as a Chowkidar in place of appellant.
2. ' According to him he is the resident of village Tooha, Tehsil Charbagh, District Swat where a Primary School meant for girls was established by the Provincial Government and his father namely Shamshi was appointed as a part-time Class-IV servant with the clear understanding that whenever the post will be sanctioned, he will be posted against it. In 1987 the post of Chowkidar was sanctioned but his father being of old age and as a result of ill health was not appointed and in his place the appellant was employed vide order No, 1417-66, dated 6-10-1987 and he took over the job on 14-12-1987 in pursuance of the said order by respondent No,
5. However, to his utter disappointment on 10-1-1988 respondent No, 5 cancelled the earlier order in his favor and appointed respondent No, 6 in his place illegally, against facts and principles of equity and justice.
3. Neither notice was given to him nor any enquiry was conducted against him. His services were terminated at the direction of Minister for Transport, Mr. Syed Muhammad Ali Shah Bacha Lala, who recommended respondent No, 6 in place of the appellant. According to the rules in vogue Minister or M.PA. Does not figure therein and the Appointing Authority was under no circumstance obliged to accommodate the Minister in an illegal manner.
4. ' After the filing of the appeal, it so happened that the respondents submitted the written statements separately, however, not the official respondents including the S.D.E.O. (F) who passed the impugned orders but respondent No, 6 brought this fact to the notice of the Court that respondent No, 6 being of underage was dismissed from service and in his place one Habibullah son of Abdul Raziq was employed. This was the plea taken by the appellant that respondent No, 6 was of under-age and under the rules he could not be appointed. Appellant then filed an application with the prayer that in the light of the written statement by respondent No, 6, Habibullah son of Abdul Raziq resident of Adoo/Tuha Tehsil Charbagh; District Swat may be impleaded as a party as his appointment was also illegal and with mala fide intention and he is a necessary party. So Habibullah was impleaded as a party who submitted the written statement denying the allegations of the appellant, like the official respondents.
5. ' Arguments heard and the record perused.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that he was performing his duties honestly and diligently and without any fault of him, he was terminated from service at the intervention of the concerned M.PA., who at the relevant time was holding the portfolio of transport. M.PAs. And Ministers do not figure in the rules. Appointing authority, in the case of the appellant and respondents 6 and 7, was the S.D.E.O. (F) and under the relevant rules, she must have applied her independent and impartial mind to appoint/dismiss the appellant/the respondents 6 and 7. On the other hand a perusal of the impugned order would show that she otherwise acted at the direction of the M.PA. Appellant preferred the departmental appeal, but within the statutory period of limitation it was not decided; hence the present appeal.
7. ' On the other hand Government Pleader argued that Government of N.- W.F.P. Had chalked out a policy vide which the M.PAs were authorised to recommend the persons of their areas for appointments to the various Government departments and respondent No, 5 acted accordingly at the direction of the M.PA. Concerned, who happened to be the Minister of Transport at the particular occasion. According to them no illegality was committed by respondent No, 5.
8. ' Counsel for respondent No, 7 argued that departmental appeal filed by the appellant was before a wrong forum i,e, Divisional Director of Education and Director of Education and the present appeal is accordingly incompetent. Besides this, the respondent No, 5 complied with the direction of the concerned M.PA. In accordance with the policy in vogue at that time.
9. ' We have given our patient hearing to the arguments advanced by the parties. So far as the impugned order dated 10-1-1988 is concerned, it clearly shows that the service of the appellant was dismissed at the recommendations of Minister of Transport, Mr. Syed Muhammad Ali Shah Bacha Lala and in his place respondent No, 6 was appointed. It so happened that the appellant produced a letter from the Headmaster where respondent No, 6 had been studying and according to it his date of birth was 1-4-1973. It was submitted with the request to the concerned authority to look into it and review the order passed in favour of respondent No, 6 by reinstating the appellant.
10. However, his agonies did not come to end and instead of his reinstatement, respondent No, 5 appointed respondent No, 7 again at the recommendations of the same M.PA. She filed the written statement but did not bring this fact to the notice of the Court which shows her mala fides and nepotism. When the appellant came to know of the new happening after filing of the written statement by respondent No, 6, he moved the Court for impleading Habibullah son of Abdul Raziq as a party and declaring this order as illegal and mala fide. Although appellant did not challenge the subsequent order before the next higher authority; yet the Tribunal is empowered to adjudicate upon the problem being faced by a party during the pendency of the case at the hands of the Government functionaries because the Tribunal is to give substantial justice to the litigant civil servant and should not go through the technicalities, vide which the agonies of a Government servant are increased. He is a poor Chowkidar and the Tribunal being the Court of appeal, sits upon the orders passed by the departmental authorities. The orders passed by the departmental authorities merged into orders finally passed by this Tribunal. Moreover, it was the duty of the authority to whom the appellant addressed through the appeal to send the said appeal to the proper forum by intimating the appellant to seek his redress from him. In the instant case the appeal addressed to the Director of Education, N.-W.F.P., Peshawar was marked by him to the D.E.O.
(F) Swat for doing the needful, who processed the same to respondent No, 5 with the direction to stop the pay of the new comer and settle the case within a week. It is dated 27-1-1988. But no action was taken by the D.E.O. Concerned at the appeal entrusted to her by the Director of Education, N.-W.F.P., Peshawar. Present appeal is accordingly held to be competent and also within time when we go through the forwarding memo. No, 2631, dated 27-1-1988 of the office of D.E.O. (F)
11. Swat at Saidu Shard. On the grounds referred to above, we accept the appeal, set aside the impugned order and reinstate the appellant in service from the date he was dismissed with all back benefits to him. Parties are, however, left to bear their own costs.
12. ' Before parting with the appeal we deem it proper to bring this matter to the notice of the Provincial Government through the Chief Secretary of the Province that in many cases we come across such illegalities which can be easily avoided if refresher courses for the different departmental Heads/Appointing Authorities are held by the Government in the Rural Academy, Peshawar vide which the authorities would introduce themselves with the service matters, the procedure for appointment and dismissal from service and the method to conduct the enquiry. It would save the Government from unnecessary expenses incurred by it by defending the cases through private counsel and approaching the higher forum through appeals. If this is not feasible the Government may include the service laws in the syllabus prescribed for the trainees of the different departments, undergoing the training at the Rural Academy, Peshawar. Similarly we have perused the appointment orders in the instant case and have the occasion to go through such like orders in other cases. No set method/procedure is adopted by the appointing authorities in ease of the appointments made by them. For example the first order made on 6-10-1987 in favor of the appellant would show that besides other conditions it was also one of the terms and conditions of service that the employee will produce health and age certificate from the Civil Surgeon/Medical Superintendent. This condition was waived in the case of the impugned order. It is, therefore, urged that the S & G A Department may circulate a preform to the various Government departments working under it in the Province through which the terms and conditions of the different employees recruited on contract basis and temporary basis may be highlighted. File be consigned to the record room.