' MRS. SYEDA TAHIRA SAFDAR (MEMBER-II).---As per appellant he was working as. Assistant Manager- in Industries Department since 1977, when his- services were terminated on 17-2-1982.
Whereupon, he filed service appeal which was dismissed, whereupon he filed appeal before Supreme Court. During pendency of the same, he was reinstated in service without any financial benefits through Notification dated 23-9-1987. While on his representation the said notification was withdrawn and full financial benefits were allowed to him through notification dated 13-12-1988.
Whereby he was allowed to draw arrears of his pay to the extent of Rs,1,95,246.02 from Treasury Office, Kohlu. But afterwards an inquiry was held against him on allegation that the arrears has been drawn unauthorisedly, as the order dated 13-12-1988 was not genuine rather forged. Thus, as a result of inquiry he was dismissed from service through order made on 25-8-1991. Whereupon he filed review petition, which remained pending, whereafter he filed service appeal which was dismissed through order made on 2-6-1996. Moreover, he had paid back the amount allegedly overdrawn. Thereafter, he again approached the Chief Minister of Balochistan, whereupon he was reinstated in service through Notification dated 1-1-1998.
2. It is further his case that one Zahoor Ahmed Durrani filed writ petition against the Government and Minister Industries. In the same his (the appellant) reinstatement was also challenged being made without lawful authority. The said petition was withdrawn on 16-7-1998 with certain conditions. While to his (the appellant) extent it was ordered that if required departmental action can be taken against him. But no action was taken against him by said Zahoor Ahmed. Thereafter, a suo motu reference was held on report of Sessions Judge Inspection which was heard by Full Bench, while through judgment made on 28-6-1999, the notice dated 11-11-1998 was withdrawn. But thereafter without issuing any notice, Notification dated 28-2-2000 was issued, whereby he was dismissed from services. He preferred appeal but no reply.
3. The appellant has prayed for setting aside of impugned notification and also his reinstatement in service with all back benefits. He has preferred present appeal on the grounds that he has been removed from services on wrong assumption, which is illegal, further the action is unconstitutional, furthermore, he has been condemned unheard.
4. In reply respondent No,1 has raised contention that initial appointment of the appellant was on ad hoc basis, which was extended time to time. While afterwards his case was placed before a Special Committee, constituted by the Government for regularisation, on recommendation of the same the services of the appellant were terminated through Notification dated 17-2-1982. The service appeal filed by him (the appellant) was dismissed through judgment made on 3-12-1983.
But thereafter the appellant approached the then Chief Minister who re-instated him in service on 23-9-1987, with no financial benefit. It is further their contention that in June 1989 on basis of a forged document the appellant managed to draw an amount of Rs,195,246.29 on account of his salary for the period during which he remained out of service. Therefore, an enquiry was conducted against him, being found guilty, he was again dismissed from services. The appellant again filed service appeal, which was also dismissed. But in January, 1998 on instance of the then Minister for Industries namely Sardar Abdul Rehman Khetran, the appellant was again reinstated in services w,e,f, 1-1-1998. It is further their contention that as the initial appointment of the appellant was made on ad hoc basis, which was not made regular. Further on 1-1-1998 no post of Assistant Manager against initial recruitment quota was available, therefore, his (the appellant), reinstatement on promotion post was also illegal and unlawful. The termination of services of the appellant was in accordance with relevant law. The appeal is also time-barred. The appeal is liable to be dismissed.
5. Respondents Nos.2 and No,3 also raised same contention in their replies, while prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
6. As per appellant his services are terminated on wrongful assumption and without adopting proper procedure, also not given opportunity to be heard. While on the other hand the respondents not only denied his assertions rather raised contention that due to unsatisfactory record of his service, embezzlement of amount and also due to dismissal of appeals by Service Tribunal, his reinstatement in services was unlawful, thus, he has been rightly dismissed from service.
7. The perusal of the record reveals that the initial appointment of the appellant was made on ad hoc basis, which was not regularised uptill his last termination order made on 28-2-2000, which is presently impugned before this Tribunal. Further, at both rounds of litigation this Tribunal does not find any legal defect in the impugned orders, whereby the appellant was removed/dismissed from services. Despite the same the appellant was reinstated in services by the then Chief Minister. This is a worst example of undue favour, which is not good in eye of law. It is further an admitted position that the appellant was involved in withdrawal of an amount of Rs,1,95,296.02 through fraudulent means. He himself has filed receipts of repayment of said amount. He has not given any explanation that how he has withdrawn said amount and why he had agreed to repay the same.
He only raised contention that he has repaid the said amount and nothing is outstanding against him His own assertion amounts to be an admission in respect of the same.
8. Apart from the same the Honourable High Court of Balochistan while deciding the Constitutional petition filed by one Zahoor Ahmed Durrani and suo motu Constitutional petition held that the concerned Department can take the matter relating to reinstatement of the appellant departmentally and decide the same in accordance with law. Thus, in view of the same the concerned Department has every right to look into the matter and take any action in same respect.
The impugned Notification dated 28-2-2000 is issued after said decisions of honourable High Court of Balochistan, thus to this extent there was no bar on the Department for taking any son of action against the appellant, even removing him from service. Further, the repayment of amount, allegedly worongfully drawn by the appellant, does not make him entitled to remain in services.
Rather this repayment proved the said allegation of fraud and embezzlement. Furthermore, the appellant has not been removed from service on any new charge, rather the action has been taken in continuation of the previous orders. No further inquiry is required in present circumstances.
It is an admitted position that the reinstatement of the appellant was made keeping aside the relevant law and procedure, which is not proper. Even also in contravention of orders of this Tribunal which is highly objectionable Through impugned notification the illegality has been removed.
9. In present case it is painfully noted that the Authorities do not keep the laws and rules in their view while taking decision in respect of any matter. The rules are changed only in order to give benefit to any particular person, which is highly objectionable. If the Authorities follow the relevant Law and rules, consider merits of each and every case, there will be less apprehension of unjust decisions. In addition to the same appellant cannot take benefit of the language used in impugned notification, maybe it is defective to some extent. The Departments/Authorities must be vigilant while issuing such orders. Further, no benefit can be given to the appellant of being showing him as handicap, in circumstances of present case.
10. The appellant has completely failed to make out any case in his favour. His reinstatement in service was rightly held to be unlawful, and his removal from services does not suffer from any illegality. The appeal being baseless thus hereby is dismissed.
11. No orders as to cost. File after completion be consigned to record.