SAJJAD ALI SHAH, J---Vide letter dated 30-1-1990, petitioner was selected for temporary appointment as Stenographer in BPS-15 in Pakistan Environmental Protection Agency at Islamabad under Ministry of Housing and Works. It is mentioned in the said letter that he will be on probation for a period of one year extendable by a period of another one year and if no specific order for termination of probation is issued before the expiry of first year of probation the period of probation shall be deemed to have been extended for another year.
2. On 31-1-1990 another letter was issued with reproduction of terms and conditions of service as in the first letter with addition that he will improve his shorthand/typing to the standard of Stenographer i.e. 100/SO words per minute within 6 months failing which his services will be terminated. For the purpose of his appointment, petitioner had appeared before Departmental Selection Committee composed of Chairman and 2 Members and was recommended for the appointment with observation that he be appointed on provisional basis and would be required to improve the speed of his shorthand within 6 months in order to bring it up to the required standard.
Consequent upon such observation, letter of appointment had to be modified with inclusion of condition of passing the test of shorthand within 6 months. Petitioner reported for duty and took over on 31-1-1990 in the afternoon.
3. Vide office order dated 7-5-1992 services of the petitioner were terminated for the reason that he failed to fulfil the condition of improving his shorthand and typing speed i.e. 100/50 words per minute within 6 months of the joining of the duties, which time was extended on several occasions. Petitioner filed departmental appeal and on getting no response within the stipulated time filed appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal, which is dismissed by judgment against which leave is sought to file appeal before us.
4. On behalf of the petitioner, it is contended that he had completed his period of probation and order of termination passed after expiry of period of probation is illegal and not sustainable in law. Secondly, that original letter of appointment was unconditional in which it was not mentioned that petitioner had to pass the test for improvement of his shorthand. Thirdly, petitioner performed his duties efficiently and diligently and even Team Leader of Asian Development Bank Project praised his work.
5. With the assistance of the learned counsel we have gone through the impugned judgment and other relevant documents included in the paper book and are of the view that contentions raised are untenable and not substantiated. Appointment of the petitioner was temporary and conditional to the effect that he had to pass the test to improve his shorthand within 6 months and this fact clearly appears in the minutes of the meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee. For that reason second appointment letter was issued including condition of passing the test within six months. Petitioner cannot deny the knowledge of this condition because he had himself applied for extensions of time, which were granted but he never sat for that test. He avoided the test by sending leave applications on medical grounds and sometime asking for time for the purpose of preparation to improve his speed and take the test. He succeeded in getting such extensions by obtaining favourable notes from the Minister concerned and Foreign Consultants. The Minister allowed him four months time to learn shorthand vide letter dated 3-1-1991 and such extension for that period was granted. Petitioner then made a representation to the Prime Minister of Pakistan and in that connection query was made which was replied with all necessary details. Again on the recommendation of the Minister another extension was granted for four months. After that petitioner applied for three months leave for the purpose of preparation but did not sit in the test. Test was again fixed on 6-11-1991 but he again applied to the Minister for extension of time, which was not allowed and finally by order dated 7-5-1992 his services were terminated for his failure to pass the requisite test.
The stand taken before the Service Tribunal by the department is fully supported by documents, applications and orders which are included in the paper book.
6. We are unable to find any flaw or legal infirmity in the impugned judgment, which is hereby upheld and in the result leave is refused and petition is dismissed as having no merits.