1. MUHAMMAD QAIM JAN KHAN (CHAIRMAN).---This is a service appeal under section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act, 1974 filed by Qabool Shah against the impugned order of respondent No. 1, dated 5-7-1994 by which the appointment order of the appellant dated 19-6-1994 has been cancelled.
2. Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the appellant was appointed as Chowkidar by respondent No. 1 on 19-6-1994 in Government Primary School, Beesak Banda (Gadoon) and has been performing his duty to the entire satisfaction of his superiors. Copy of appointment order is Annexure ' A' . That all of a sudden without any rhyme or reason on 5-7-1994, respondent No. 1 illegally and without any justification terminated the services of the appellant by cancelling his appointment order dated 19-6-1994. Copy of this order is Annexure 'B'. The appellant preferred a departmental appeal to respondent No. 2 on 26-7-1994 but as the same has not been responded in statutory limitation period, hence the present appeal. Copy of the departmental appeal and affidavit are Annexures C and D. The grounds of appeal are that the impugned order of respondent No. 1 is illegal, ultra vires and without jurisdiction, hence liable to be set aside. The impugned order is vague, based on mala fide and not a speaking order. Moreover, the impugned order is the result of political rivalry and victimisation and is also against the prevailing law, rules and practice Pertaining to the appointment and removal of Class IV Government servants. The appointment of appellant was not a concession or an at of kindness but is a matter of right and entitlement and thus the impugned order is against the principle of natural justice. Moreover, respondent No. 2 has failed to exercise a jurisdiction vested in him and his silence over the departmental appeal of the appellant is not justified legally and is also against the norms of justice and equity. In the prayer the appellant has asked for the setting aside of the impugned order and the restoration of the appellant on his job with full back benefits.
3. Notices were issued to the respondents. They appeared through their respective representative/counsel, submitted reply to which the appellant has also submitted his rejoinder and after that detailed arguments of Mr. Ashraf Khan Gadoon, Advocate for appellant and Mr. Sikandar Sahibzada Advocate (Government Pleader) for respondents have been heard and record perused.
4. As far as the legal preliminary objections are concerned, the appeal is perfectly competent and maintainable in its present form. The appellant has got every cause of action and locus standi as he had been deprived from a legal right. There is nothing on the record to show any type of mis joinder and non joinder of necessary parties and last of all being a service matter this Tribunal had got perfect jurisdiction to entertain the present appeal.
5. On factual side the case is simple and clear. The appellant Qabool Shah was appointed as Chowkidar at Government Primary School, Basak Banda (Gadoon) against a vacant post on fixed pay of Rs.1,200 per month. The appointment was made on contract basis. As a result of the appointment order, the appellant took over the charge in the said school which is reflected from Annexure 'A/R' duly verified by the Head Teacher of the said school. The appellant right from the date of appointment uptill the order of cancellation of his appointment has performed his, duty in the said school, which so evident from the photocopy of the register of attendance, copy of which is Annexure B/R. In this Annexure there is also a note, which clearly shows that the appellant has taken over his charge duly verified by the Head Teacher. Moreover, there is also a photocopy placed on the record in which at Silsela Number 212, dated 19-6-1994, Number Shumar 188 clearly shows 3 copies of the charge report of Qabool Shah, Chowkidar. On the other hand the respondents had come with a baseless allegation that the appointment order was cancelled because the appellant failed to take over charge within 15 days allowed to him in the said order.
6. This allegation has no documentary proof on the part of the respondent department and on the other hand the charge report and attendance register duly verified by the Head Teacher of the said school clearly supports the version of the appellant. So, in this background of the case the cancellation order of the appointment of the appellant (Annexure 'B') which gives no reasons or detail is nothing but a nullity and thus we accept the present appeal, set aside the impugned order dated 5-7-1994 by virtue of which the appointment order of the appellant dated 19-6-1994 has automatically revived and he is still a Chowkidar at the said school and is perfectly entitled for all remuneration and back benefits. No, order as to costs. File be consigned to the record.