MIAN SHAKIRULLAH JAN, J.---The petitioner who is at employee of the Town Committee, Serai Naurang, as a Tractor Driver, has questioned through the instant writ petition the order of the Administrator of the Committee dated 4-8-1994 vide which his appointment order dated 2-8-1994 was withdrawn with immediate effect.
2. The facts as alleged by the petitioner are that he was appointed as a driver on daily wages in the Town Committee mentioned above and was working as such when in the meanwhile to posts of the Tractor Drivers were created and sanctioned by the Government against which the petitioner and another person Mumtaz were appointed vide order of the Administrator dated 2-8-1994. The relevant portion of the said order reads as follows:-- "The Administrator, Town Committee, Sarai Naurang is pleased to adjust the services of the following to tractor drivers against the sanctioned posts of drivers in BPS-4 vide sanction advice NO.IV/LCB/3-9-1993, dated 6-7-1994:--
(1) Mr. Ihsanullah Khan son of Alam Khan driver.
(2) Mr. Mumtaz Khan son of Sher Dad Khan driver.
They are appointed as a drivers with effect from 2-8-1994 on the following terms and conditions: They are placed in BPS-4 and will draw their monthly pay plus admissible allowances according to rules. They will be entitled to all such facilities to which a regular employee of this Town Committee are entitled or extended and regularised by the Provincial Government in Local Government from the to the.
3. The petitioner assumed the charge and had attended to his duties when the impugned order, which reads as under, was issued-- "The office order issued vide No. 72/PF TOSN, dated 2-8-1994 is hereby withdrawn with immediate effect."
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in addition to the fact that the impugned order was passed at the instance of the Minister concerned based on the ground of political liking and disliking is also in violation of the law and rules. Learned counsel for the respondents in reply contended that according to Rule 9 of the Local Councils Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1980, the employees if 'having any grievance may file an appeal in accordance with the provisions mentioned therein and without making such an attempt the recourse to the Court through a writ petition is unwarranted.
5. The appointment order of the petitioner against the sanctioned posts does not suffer from any illegality or irregularity and the learned counsel for the respondents also could not point out any such thing. The appeal provided under Rule 9 of the Rules ibid could only be filed if the incumbent had been proceed against under the said rules which is not the case before us. The respondents have adopted a novel way by withdrawing the order vide which the posts were created and sanctioned the effect of which is the termination of services of the petitioner. It is also not the case of the respondents that the petitioner was appointed on probation or on temporary basis. It was submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the other employee Mumtaz who was appointed with the petitioner through the same order was re-employed after passing the impugned order and in which respect he produced his appointment order which reads as follows:-- "On the recommendation of concerned M.P.A. Constituency PF-59 Mr. Attaullah Jan Khan, Minister for Transport, N.-W.F.P., the Administrator, Town Committee, Serai Naurang is pleased to appoint Mr. Mumtaz Khan son of Sher Dad Khan as Tractor Driver in BPS-4 vide sanctioned advice No. IV/LCB/3- 9/93, dated 6-7--1994 with effect from 8-8-1994. "
6. The abovementioned facts also gives support to the version of the petitioner with regard to the mala fides on the part of the respondent which prompted them to terminate the services of the petitioner by withdrawing the order of his appointment.
7. Consequently in view of the discussion made above, this writ petition is accepted and the impugned order dated 4-8-1994 is declared as without lawful authority and to be of no legal effect.