1. QAZI MUHAMMAD FAROOQ, J.---This judgment will dispose of Writ Petitions Nos. 1486, 1487, 1488, 1489, 1490, 1491, 1492, 1493, 1494, 1495, 1496, 1499, 1500, 1501, 1502, 1503, 1504, 1505, 1506, 1507, 1508, 1509, 1510, 1511, 1512, 1513, 1514, 1519, 1520, 1527, 1539, 1540, 1541, 1542 of 1996 and 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 26, 561, 568, 570, 574, 774 of 1997 as they all raise a common question of law, namely, whether a contract employee can challenge the order terminating his services through a writ-petition.
2. 2.It is unnecessary to give detailed facts of the cases. Suffice it to say that at the the of termination of their services all the petitioners were contract employees working against different posts in a forging aided project called National Vocational Training Project Phase-II, controlled by the Government of N.-W.F.P. Directorate of Manpower and Training, and their services were terminated on different dates owing to completion of the project. Feeling aggrieved they have challenged the validity of the orders terminating their services by means of the aforementioned writ petitions.
3. 3.At the outset a preliminary objection was raised on behalf of the respondents that the writ petitions having been filed by contract employees were not maintainable. However, before adverting to the preliminary objection the learned counsel for the petitioners addressed lengthy arguments on the merits of the cases. The main thrust of the contentions was that at one stage the status of as many as 44 petitioners was that of regular employees but towards the fag-end their services were arbitrarily extended on contract basis and that the impugned orders were mala fide, arbitrary, unfair and the exercise was carried out on the basis of "pick and choose" and in utter violation of the cardinal principle "last come first go". It was also contended that the directive of the Chief Secretary, N.-W.F.P. That all that contract employees who were employed in foreign-aided Projects/Dotter assisted projects within the Province shall continue to be retained on contact as per their terms of service was also flouted and apart from that on hilt one hand the services of the petitioners were terminated on the ground of completion of the Project and on the other certain posts had been advertised. As regards the preliminary objection it was contended that the writ petitions were maintainable as the petitioners were neither civil servants no contract employees but belonged to an unclassified service.
4. 4.The learned Additional Advocate-General, on the caper hand, contended with vehemence that all the petitioners were contract employees and the writ petitions are not maintainable because it is by now well-settled that contractual obligations cannot be enforced by invocation and exercise of writ jurisdiction. Reliance was placed on PLD 1962 SC 108, 1984 CLC 2168 and 1987 M LD 153.
5. 5.The first point for determination pertains to the nature of service of the petitioners. It is true that all the petitioners were not initially, appointed on contract basis but it is evident from the record that it was clearly mentioned in their appointment letters that their appointment will be temporary and non-pensionable and will last till the continuity of phase-II of N.V.T.P. The record also makes it manifest that the Project had ended on 31-6-1996 and, thereafter, services of all the employees were ended on contract basis for a period of 6 months with effect from 1-7-1996 to 31-12-1996.
6. There is nothing on the record to suggest that the petitioners raised any objection in any manner against the extension of their service on contract basis. The orders in regard to the extension of their services on contract basis boldly spell out that their appointment shall stand 1.Rminated on 31-12-1996 without any notice. In this backdrop there is no difficulty in holding that at the the of termination of their services all the petitioners were contract employees. It hardly needs any mention that curious expression ' unclassified service' was coined by the learned counsel for the petitioners with a view to exclude the petitioners from the ambit of civil servants or contract employees. Be that as it may, the expression is more imaginary than real as it does not have backing of any statute.
7. 6.The second point for determination relates to the maintain liability of the writ petitions. After going through the authoritative judgment cited in support of the preliminary objection we have no doubt in our mind that a contract employee cannot file a writ petition to seek redress in respect of a grievance relating to the terms and conditions of his service. The ratio of the judgment of the Supreme Court reported as Messrs Momin Motor, Company v. The Regional Transport Authority, Dacca and others (PLD 19t,., SC 108) is that contractual rights are not enforceable by recourse to writ jurisdiction. In Major (Retd.) Khalilur Rehman v. Overseas Pakistanis Foundation and another (1984 CLC 2168) it was observed that contractual obligations and liabilities relating to a service matter cannot be enforced by resort to writ jurisdiction. In M.A. Rashid v. The Province of the Punjab and 2 others (1987 M LD 153) it was held that the Constitutional jurisdiction cannot be exercised in respect of a petitioner whose services have been terminated in accordance with the terms of his contract.
8. 7.The petitioners were contract employees pure and simple and their services were terminated in accordance with the terms and conditions of their contract, therefore, the writ petitions filed by them are not maintainable. It is scarcely necessary to mention that there is no need to touch the merits of the cases as the preliminary objection raised by the respondents has been upheld.
9. For the foregoing reasons we find no justification in interfering with the impugned orders. The writ petitions are, therefore, dismissed alongwith the pending Civil Miscellaneous. No order as to costs. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.