' ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, J.--By common order we propose to dispose of the abovementioned petitions as they arise out of judgment dated 20-7-2000 of the learned Sindh Service Tribunal, Karachi whereby the appeals of respondents were allowed and they were reinstated in service. It is against the abovementioned judgment the petitioner-Government of Sindh seeks leave to appeal.
2. The relevant facts leading to the filing of the petitions are that in response to the advertisement dated 1-10-1994 for the posts of Excise and Taxation Inspectors (BPS-14), the respondents opted for the same and were found academically eligible. In consequence whereof they appeared in the interviews on 16-7-1995, 20-8-1995 and 7-9-1995 respectively and were selected on temporary basis on two years' probationary period extendable for further one year. After usual formalities they joined the Excise and Taxation Department on 21-9-1995 and 14-9-1995 respectively and undergone departmental training till 2-12-1995 and 8-1-1996. The respondent Saleem Raza after qualifying departmental examination on 19-12-1995 was regularised on 26-12-1995 whereas Ghulam Sarwar Lashari was also posted on regular basis on 8-1-1996: It was ,on 28-3-1998 they received notices of termination of their services wherein it was mentioned that their appointments were made in violations of the rules prescribed by the Sindh Civil Servants Act, 1973 and also principle laid down by this Court in its judgment in Human Right Case No,104 of 1992. The petitioner finding their reply not satisfactory terminated their services on 11-5-1998. The respondents preferred their departmental appeals to the Appellate Authority (Chief Secretary, Government of Sindh) on 15-6-1998 and 5-6-1998 respectively which were dismissed on 5-10-1998 and 25-1-1999 and the copies whereof were received by them on 12-10-1998 and 30-1-1999 respectively.
3. We have heard Mr. Suleman Habibullah, learned Additional Advocate-General, Sindh on behalf of the petitioner at length and have gone through the record and proceedings of the matter in detail.
4. Mr. Suleman Habibullah mainly urged that the services of the respondents were rightly terminated by the competent authority finding that they were appointed in clear disregard of the rules and formalities. He, however, could not rebut that their services were regularised and that they were also discriminated with other 25 Inspectors whose orders of termination were set aside and allowed to continue their services by the petitioner.
5. It would be pertinent to refer that the petitioner in his written statement filed before the Tribunal categorically admitted the pleas of the respondents raised by them in the appeals that they were offered posts of Excise and Taxation Inspectors (BPS-14) on temporary basis after finding them eligible by the Selection Committee on 7-5-1995 and thereafter their services were made regularised on 26-12-1995 and 8-1-1996. Irrespective of the above, the petitioner iri the said written statement admitted the contents of paras. Nos.12, 13 and 14 whereby the respondents had attained the status of permanent civil servants and were allowed G.P.-Fund Account Numbers, Permanent Salary Slips, Service Books and Annual Increments. They had also completed probation period of two years on 9-9-1997 successfully and were posted at different Districts and had gained excellent ACRs, As per the judgment of the Tribunal the petitioner failed to produce the minutes of the Departmental Selection Committee and the other record about the selection on political basis and others as such did not accept the same to be convincing. Moreover a clear case of discrimination and double standard has been noticed in this case. The Appellate Authority viz. Chief Secretary, Sindh on the same material and same allegations dismissed the appeal/representation of the respondents whereas set aside the order of termination in respect of 25 other Inspectors and allowed their appeals. There seems to be no justification to interfere with the findings of the Service Tribunal.
' Resultantly, these petitions being without merits are dismissed and leave to appeal is refused.