JUDGMENTM.MAHMUD ASLAM PIRZADA, CHAIRMAN.-Dr. Munawar Hussain, Ex- Medical Officer, has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974 against the impugned order dated 30.1.1989, passed by respondent No.2. The appellant has impleaded Government of the Punjab through the Chief Secretary and Secretary, Punjab Health Department as respondents.
Through this appeal the appellant has prayed that the impugned order dated 30.1.1089, passed by respondent No.2 be set aside and he be reinstated in service.
2. The salient features of this case briefly are that the appellant joined service as Medical Officer on ad-hoc basis on 20.10.85, On 30.1.1989, the respondent No:2 terminated the services of the appellant for misconduct. Hence this appeal.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant at length, at this stage of preliminary hearing and also perused the file as well as relevant documents with care.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the order of termination having been passed on account of alleged misconduct amounts to an order of dismissal from service carrying a stigma in his favour. The appellant could not be thrown out of service without the resort or proper inquiry and show cause notice as laid down in the Punjab Civil Servants (E&D) Rules 1975.
5. We have given our anxious thought to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant. Before entering into controversy of this case we would like to reproduce the relevant portion of the impugned order dt 30.1.1989.
" The services of Dr. Munawar Hussain, Medical Officer working on adhoc basis, at Noorpur. Thai Hospital, District Khushab, are terminated on account of mis-conduct. The period of his absence from duty fr6m 1.6.1988 shall be treated as leave without Pay."
It will also be relevant to reproduce the terms and conditions laid down in his order of appointment contained in No.SO/ (Admn:II)-25-14-1985 dated 16.9.1985, issued by the Government of the Punjab, Health Department:- With reference to your application on the above subject you are hereby offered appointment on adhoc basis, purely on a stop gap arrangement to a post of MO/AMO/Registrar/Dcmonstrator/Assistant Anacsthetist/BTO etc. In BPS No:17 i.e. Rs.1600-120-3040 plus usual allowances on the following terms and conditions: -
(i) Even if the post being offered to you continues the appointment is only for a period of one year from the date of joining and at all automatically terminated on the expiry of the said period or till the availability of a selection of the Punjab Public Service Commission whichever is earlier.(ii)
Notwithstanding the condition (i) above, the appointment is subject to termination at any the without giving any notice.
(iii) For regular appointment to the post, requisition has been placed with the Public Service Commission and the Commission will advertise the posts in due course. You will have to compete before the Commission with other candidates in accordance with the Rules. If you do not compete before the Commission or are not selected by the Public Service Commission, no extension would be granted in the adhoc appointment alid your service will stand terminated as per clause (i).
(iv) The adhoc appointment will not confer any right for regular appointment to the same post nor the service will count towards seniority.
(v) You will have to join duty at your own expense.
Vi) In case you wish to resign at any the, a month's notice shall be necessary or in lieu thereof amonth's pay will be fore-feated.
(Vii) You will be governed by Civil Servants Act, 1974 such rules and orders relating to leave travelling allowance, medical attendance, pay etc. As may be issued by Government for the category of Government servants to which you belong.
(Viii) You will have to produce a Medical certificate of fitness.
(ix) You will be allowed private practice after office hours unless specially debarred. While attached to a non practising post, non-practising allowance as sanctioned by Government from the to the will be allowed. The permission for private practice will be subject to the condition that it does not interfere with the performance of official duties. You will not be permitted to open any Clinic private dispensary or nursing home not to have any interest in such a clinic, nursing home, private hospital, dispensary or a druggion shop. The private practice shall be confined to seeing patient at your residence or in the patient's home and also in the private ward of the hospital to which your are attached. You will not be permitted sale of medicines to patients at your residence.If you accept the post on these conditions, you should report yourself for duty to the Director Health Services, Punjab Lahore____________ and produce original certificates in connectionwith your qualifications, domicile etc."
It is now very clear from the offer of appointment that the appellant after thorough reading of clauses of the terms and conditions including clause (ii) and (iv) accepted the offer of appointment fully knowlingly that his appointment was purely ad-hoc and subject to termination at any the without giving any notice and this ad-hoc appointment will not confer any right for regular appointment to the same post therefore, he is now estopped to claim any right of retention in service and the impugned order was passed in a justified manner.
We would also like to reproduce section 2(i)(a) of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974:-"Ad-hoc appointment" means appointment of a duly qualified person made otherwise than in accordance with the prescribed method of recruitment pending recruitment in accordance with such method."
The bare reading of the section 2(i)(a) makes it very clear that the adhoc appointment is never in accordance with prescribed manner and is liable to be terminated immediately on the availability of the recommendce of the P.S.C. The adhoc appointment of the appellant was only a stop-gap arrangement and the Respondent was under no legal obligation to regularise his service. The learned counsel for the appellant relied on the case of Muhammad Siddique Ch.Reported as PLD 1974 SC 393. The operative portion of the ruling is as under:- "In my opinion, if the service of a probationer is terminated on the ground of unsatisfactory work that will not amount to dismissal or removal from service, such termination will be in terms of the Contract or the rules made by the Government but if the service of a probationer is terminated on the ground of misconduct that will amount to removal or dismissal. It will be a stigma in his favour.
In ' the last mentioned case, the probationer will be protected by the provisions of Article 177 of the Constitution of 1962 and will be entitled to a show-cause notice and a proper enquiry against him must be made.In strict senso the case so relied upon by the learned Counsel for the appellant is not relevant as Muhammad Siddique Ch. Was a probationer and not adhoc employee. The adhoc appointee has no locus standi as has been laid down by their lordship of the Supreme Court of Pakistan in case reported as 1982 SCM R 877.
"Adhoc appointments truly so called being not in accordance with the Rule applicable to the service cannot receive either recognition or protection by reference to any of the Rule because they do not imply appointments to the service as such. Such appointments being outside the purview of the Rules cannot for any purpose be treated as conferring a benefit under the Rules."
Since the adhoc appointee has no vested legal rights to continue in service once the Department has resorted to a fresh recruitment through the prescribed method. The contention of the Learned Counsel for the appellant is without any substance. We do not find any force in this appeal and dismiss the same in limine. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.