JUDGMENT IHSAN-UL-HAQ CHAUDHARY. J.-- The relevant, facts for the decision of this Constitutional petition are that respondent No. 3 wanted to make appointments of Dispensers BS-6. Clerks BS-5 and Naib Qasids BS-1 etc. The public notice inviting applications was published in the Daily Newspaper dated 23.3.1995. The petitioner eas appointed as Naib Qasid vide order dated 26.6.1995.
He was to remain on probition for a period of two years. The service of the petitioner was terminated vide order dated 18.6.1997 which has been challansed through this petition.
2. The petition came up for limine hearing on 10.7.01997 when respondent No. 3 was directed to apear alongwith complete record. The order has been compikws with. The learned Adll. A.G. on 17.7.1997 raised preliminary objection to the effect that since the service of the petitioner has been terminated duribg the probation period of two years as per terms and conditions of his appointment. therefore, he cannot maintain writ.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner while summing up the arguments submitted that even in the case of Mrs. Anisa Rehman relied by the learned Addl. A.G. It was ruled out by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that in the absence of statutory rules the employee is entitled to show-cause notice.
4. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record as well as precedent cases.
The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the case of Muhammad Siddiq Javaid Chaudhry (Supra) but that was clearly distinguished in the subsequent judgments by the Hon'ble Supreme Court particularly in the cases Of Pakistan- (Punjab Province) (Supra) relied by Addl. A.G. And Furrukh Amin, which was noted in the judgment reported as Syed Tatheer Hussain Shera:iv.
Governor of the Punjab and another (PLJ 1988 Tr.C. (Services) 33). The learned Addl. A.G. Rightly relied on the judgment in the case of Punjab Road Transport Board (Supra) in this behalf. The service of the petitioner has been terminated without any stigma and during the period of probation, therefore, there is no vioation of any obligation subsisting in favour of the petitioner. It was during the arguments it transpired that respondent No. 3 has no statutory rules. The learned Addl. A.G. Developed the arguments that in the absence of rules writ petition is not competent. He mainly relied on the case of Mrs. Anisa Rehman (supra). The learned counsel for the petitioner also pointed out that the principles of natural justice were held applicable in the said case. The case is clearly distinguishable. The petitioner was appointed, she assumed office and started performing her duties and after about 2 years she was asked to go to a post not liked by her. These facts have no semblance to the facts of the case in hand. In this behalf, we may refer to the judgment of the Hon'be Supreme Court in the case of University of the Punjab, Lahore and 2 others v. Ch., Sardar Alt (1992 SCM R 1093). The relevant portion of the judgment reads as under:-- '9. It follows from these provisions of the Act that notwithstanding sub-section (8) of section 11 of the Act. The appointment of the respondent, as judged in the light of decisions in the cases of Principal, Cadet College. Kohat (PLD 1984 SC 170) and Anwa- Hussain (PLD 1984 SC 194) was non- statutory and a Constitutor Petition was not competent as held by the learned Judge in Chambers.
Hence, this appeal is allowed. The judgment under appeal is set aside and that of the learned Judge in chambers restored. No order as to costs."
5. ' The upshot of the above discussion is that the service of the petitioner is not governed by any statutory rules and having been terminated during the probation he cannot maintain Constitutional petition.
6. The result is that this petition is dismissed in limine.
[Vol.XVI Shafique Ahmad V. I.G.P. Punjab, Lahore L&S. C.199 (Muhammad Aslam, Member-I, )