' AJMAL MIAN, J.--The petitioner through this petition has prayed for the following reliefs: "It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court will be pleased to set aside and quash the orders dated 27-1-1983 (Annexure '0') and 3-7-1984 and be further pleased to issue Mandatory Injunction ordering the respondent to resume his duty pending the disposal of petition."
2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the above petition are that the petitioner was employed by the respondent-company on 1-4-1967 in their Branch Office at Chittagong in the erstwhile East Pakistan as Medical Representative. However, his services were terminated by an order dated 27-1- 1983.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that on account of mala fides on the part of the respondent his services were terminated. It seems that he filed Civil Suit No, 3478 of 1983 for a declaration that the termination of his services was illegal and void and he remained in service. The learned Civil Judge rejected the plaint under Order VII, rule 11, C.P.C. By his order dated 11-2-1984. Thereupon, the petitioner filed Civil Revision No, 21 of 1984 which was dismissed by the learned IIIrd Additional District Judge by his order dated 3-7-1984. After that the petitioner filed the present petition and prayed for the above relief.
4. We have invited the attention of Mr. A. Q. Malik to the case of M/s. Malik & Haq and another v.
Muhammad Shamsul Islam reported in PLD 1961 SC 531 in which the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the relationship between a Firm and its employee is that of master and servant and the employee cannot seek the relief of reinstatement even in case of wrongful dismissal, and the only remedy available is to sue for damages. In the present case, admittedly the respondent is a company incorporated under the Companies Act. The ratio of the above Supreme Court case is very much applicable.
' We, would therefore, dismiss the above petition but there would be no order as to costs.