' The appellant Muhammad Sajid was approved for appointment as Sub-Engineer in the Irrigation and Power Department by the Chief Minister, Punjab, as communicated to the respondent- Department by the Deputy Secretary, C.M.'s Secretariat vide his letter, dated 15-3-1989 (Annexure B). It was followed by letter, dated 25-5-1989 (Annexure B-I) whereby C.M.'s approval to the effect was repeated. The Irrigation Department, however, appointed the appellant as Sub-Engineer in BS- 11, on an ad hoc basis, vide their letter, dated 26-6-1989 (Annexure C). The appellant challenged his ad hoc appointment, vide his application, dated 30-9-1989 (Annexure E) addressed to the Minister for Irrigation and Power stating that in the order of the Chief Minister, it was nowhere mentioned that the appellant had been appointed on an ad hoc/temporary basis. He also pointed out that he was recruited on an ad hoc basis by the Chief Engineer for one year. He urged that like other Sub- Engineers who had been recruited on an ad hoc basis and had been regularised, he should also be regularised in service. The Minister far Irrigation and Power, vide his order, dated 30-9-1989 (Annexure E) directed the Chief Engineer, Bahawalpur to regularise the appellant in service. The request was also supported by the Special Assistant to the Chief Minister, Punjab, vide his letter, dated 28-9-1989 (Annexure E-I). It was eventually decided to submit a summary to the Chief Minister (Annexure. F refers). The appellant was, however, offered ad hoc appointment for a further period of 6 months vide Chief Engineer, Bahawalpur's letter, dated 2-4-1991 (Annexure H). It was stipulated therein, amongst other terms and conditions of service of the appellant, that his services would be liable to termination in case he did not compete for regular appointment by appearing before the Departmental Selection Authority or if he was not selected by the said Authority. The services of the appellant were eventually terminated by the Chief Engineer, vide his order/letter, dated 13-9-1993 conveyed to him by the Superintending Engineer, Mailsi Canal Circle vide his letter, dated 15-9-1993 (Annexure I). The appellant challenged the aforesaid order of the termination of his services 'vide Writ Petition No,2089-93/BWP which was dismissed by the High Court (PWR Bench) vide their order as Annexure J on 23-11-1993 for want of jurisdiction. The appellant had, in the meantime filed a departmental appeal vide his application, dated 13-10-1993. Finding no response to the abovementioned appeal, the appellant filed the instant appeal before this Tribunal on 2-2-1994 on time.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant states that the appellant had actually been appointed on regular basis by the Chief Minister, vide his order dated 15-3-1989 and again vide his order, dated 25-5-1989 (Annexures B and B-I). According to him, the respondent-Department could not have legally recruited the appellant on ad hoc basis for the reason that the Chief Minister was himself vested with the powers of rule-making authority and once he had ordered the appointment of the appellant, the procedure prescribed for making recruitment through the Selection Authority under the -Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Services) Rules, 1974, would be deemed to have been relaxed. Substantiating his arguments, the learned counsel for the appellant refers to the notification, dated 28-2-1989 (Annexure M) issued by the SGA&ID by the order of the Governor of the Punjab under section 23 of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974 whereby the Chief Minister was empowered to relax conditions of service prescribed for recruitment in the relevant Service Rules in respect of all posts under the Government of the Punjab. According to the said notification, full powers were delegated to the Chief Minister to relax the service conditions prescribed in the recruitment rules. Learned counsel therefore, asserts that once appointment of the appellant was approved by the Chief Minister, the procedure prescribed for recruitment would be deemed to have been' relaxed in his favour. Learned counsel further contends that the services of the appellant could not have been terminated even if he was considered to have been recruited on an ad hoc basis unless a candidate having duly been selected and recommended for appointment as Sub-Engineer by the Selection Authority had become available to replace the appellant, as required under section 10(1)(ii) of the Punjab, Civil Servants Act, 1974. The learned counsel maintains that the termination of the services of the appellant vide order, dated 15-9-1993 was arbitrary and illegal and was, therefore, fit to be set aside. Learned counsel further urges that since the Chief Minister had already appointed the appellant as Sub-Engineer and even those who were working on ad hoc basis on 17-6-1989 were regularised in service subject to the clearance by Selection Authority, in case they fulfilled the conditions of appointment for the posts to which they were appointed on ad hoc basis (in terms of S&GAID's Notification dated 17-6-1989 (Annexure D), the appellant was entitled to 'be regularised in service. The learned counsel further refers to the meeting of the Regional Selection Committee, Bahawalpur held on 12/13-6-1988 to contend that the appellant had actually secured 85 out of 150 marks and had secured the 22nd position in the merit list (Annexure to the written objections) out of 26 candidates who turned up as against 40 candidates who had been, called for written examination and interview. The minutes of the said committee further indicated that 10% marks were reserved for interview while the remaining marks were fixed according to the technical/academic qualifications/higher qualifications and experience. He referred to para. 4 of the minutes of the meeting which indicate that out of 40 candidates, 9 candidates had absented themselves in the written test whereas 4 candidates, failed in the written test and it was out of the remaining candidates that merit list for the 26 selectees was drawn up. The crux of the argument is that the appellant had actually been selected for appointment, on regular. Basis, as Sub-Engineer. Learned counsel, therefore, contends that in the face of the above facts, it was only surprising that the appellant was given extension in service from time to time on an ad hoc basis although he should have been regularised in service straightaway in the year 1988 on the basis of the minutes of the meeting of the Selection Committee held on 12/13-6-1988. Learned counsel, therefore, avers that the impugned order should be set aside and the services of the appellant be regularised with effect from the date of meeting held by the Selection Committee i,e, with effect from 12-6-1988.
3. Appearing on behalf of the respondents, the learned DA relies on the written objections filed by them. According to him, the main plea of the respondents is that the services of the ad hoc employees recruited up to 17-6-1989 could indeed be regularised because the notification, dated 17-6-1989' was applicable only to such ad hoc employees who were working on that date. The services of the appellant could not, therefore, be regularised on the basis of the requisite notification as he was, for the first time, recruited vide order, dated 26-6-1989 (Annexure C). The learned' D.A. Further refers to the minutes of the meeting of the Selection Authority to say that at the time of the requisite selection, only 11 vacancies were available. Since the appellant had been placed at S.No,22 in the merit list, he could not have been recruited regularly as Sub-Engineer.
Learned D.A. Had, however, no answer to the question as to whether the appellant could have been appointed on an ad hoc basis once the Chief Minister had approved his appointment as Sub- Engineer without any condition whatsoever.
4. I have heard the arguments. Advanced by the parties and have perused the record. The Chief Minister exercises the powers of Rule-Making Authority in the Province. The procedure prescribed for recruitment including the selection procedure carries the sanctity of his approval. He has all the powers to relax such procedure in view of the powers delegated to him by the Governor vide notification, dated 28-2-1989 (Annexure M/E). Since in the case in hand, the appointment was ordered by the Chief Minister without any condition whatsoever, the appellant would be deemed to have been appointed on regular basis and the procedure prescribed in the rules for such appointment would be deemed to have been relaxed/dispensed with. The department was not, therefore, vested with any powers to change the nature of appointment of the appellant from regular to that of ad hoc employment.
5. In view of the foregoing discussion, I allow the appeal and set aside the impugned orders. The appellant shall be deemed to have been appointed as Sub-Engineer on regular basis with effect from the date of his ad hoc appointment i,e, from 27-6-1989.
' The parties shall bear their own costs.