' Respondents-plaintiffs in the instant suit were admittedly appointed as Forest Guards vide order dated 19-4-1994 by the Divisional Forest Officer, Swat, Social Forestry Division and upon the recommendation of duly constituted Departmental Selection Committee. The record shows that subsequent to their appointment some political pressure demanded their termination from service and hence they brought a suit before the Civil Court where a temporary injunction was already granted that they would continue in service.
2. Through order dated 18-7-1995 the learned District Judge, Swat directed the Government to pay them the arrears of their salary and also to make payment of such salary till the decision of the civil suit. Aggrieved by this order dated 18-7-1995 the Government has come up in appeal.
3. It is now a settled principle of law determined by this Court as well as the Supreme Court that any appointments made at the instance of political entities are void, ab initio, unlawful and without jurisdiction. The instant case is rather stronger to the effect that a duly made appointment by a Departmental Selection Committee is going to be annulled under political pressure. The respondents-plaintiffs had a strong prima facie case and thus were rightly granted stay order.
When a stay order is issued qua their service and they are serving already and accordingly, no one can deny the remuneration thereof and hence they are entitled to the salary as well. Without salary there cannot be any service and without salary no one serves.
4. The impugned order was passed on 18-7-1995 and the copy was obtained by the Government on that very date. The limitation for appeal being 90 days, the appeal ought to have been filed before this Court on 18-10-1995 whereas it is filed on 21-12-1995 which is time-barred most certainly by 67 days. In the accompanying petition for condonation of delay it is alleged that the sanction for filing of appeal was delayed. But the fact is that the functionaries responsible for causing delay are the functionaries of the Government which itself is a defendant in the instant case. The defendant seeks condonation of the delay caused by itself that sounds quite illogical. The appeal is hereby dismissed in limine on merits as well as hopelessly time-barred.
5. C.Ms. 10/96 as well as 11/96 are also dismissed in limine.