' The appeal is directed against the decision dated 17-6-1992, having been rendered by Mr. Ghulam Sarwar Sheikh, learned Presiding Officer of the Labour Court, Faisalabad, whereby he had accepted the grievance petition, filed by Shakeel Ahmad Shahid under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969,
2. The respondent had been employed by the F.D.A. as Junior Clerk, in the Directorate of Estate Management, in place of Mr. Abdul Hamid Chohan, Senior Clerk, who had been sanctioned earned leave (ex-Pakistan), for full one year, on 7-8-1990, under which arrangement Mr. Chohan had relinquished the charge and submitted his departure report on 17-8-1990 (A.N.). The order of appointment dated 18-8-1990 is Exh. R-3. The learned lower Court, has, however, utterly failed to comprehend the import of the appointment order, and has harped on the tune that the official, having remained in F.D.As service for a period exceeding the statutory limit of nine months, must be deemed to have acquired status of a permanent workman, by operation of law. Had he been appointed against a vacancy in any other capacity, provisional, stopgap, temporarily, work- charged, he would have becotne a permanent worker, who could not be ousted from service, without an order in writing, and without observance of other legal formalities, as service of show- cause notice/charge-sheet, and holding of a departmental enquiry against him; but the express stipulation embodied in his original letter of appointment was to the effect that he had been offered the post against the leave vacancy and further that services would automatically come to an end, or stand terminated, on resumption of duty by Mr. Abdul Hamid Chohan, Senior Clerk. This clear condition is contained in the appointment letter Exh. R-3. No matter, Mr. Chohan's extraordinary leave had been extended by 15 days, from 18-8-1991 to 1-9-1991 (Exh. R-4), this incidence would not have made any difference. Mr. Chohan had rejoined duty on 2-9-1991 (F.N.)
(Exh. R-5). How could, then, Mr. Shakeel insist On continuance in service and plead that he could avail of the benefit accruable to a workman, in normal course, and how could he invoke the aid of the Labour laws, by having recourse to a Labour Court? The Labour Court had not at all adverted to the requisite understanding or undertaking embodied in the respondent's appointment letter dated 18-8-1990 (R-3), and oblivious of the unambiguous import and intent of the same, and the nature of the assignment, the respondent was holding, had jumped to the conclusion, by following his familiar pattern that the official had attained permanence in service, and he could not be removed from service except by following the prescribed procedure. It must be taken to be a contractual employment, and the official could not be permitted to wriggle out of his own clear commitment.
3. I am not prepared to affirm or endorse the impugned decision, which must not be permitted to hold the field. It is hereby vacated, and the F.D.As. appeal, being wholly sound, is accepted, with of course no order as to costs.