' FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.---This petition is directed against the impugned judgment dated 18-10-1999, passed by a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in I.C.A. No, 856 of 1999.
2. The petitioner was appointed as a teacher in the Kasur Public School, Kasur, a body registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. His services were terminated by the respondents No,1 by order .Dated 20-2-1999. The petitioner filed Writ Petition No,12968 of 1999 which was disposed of by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, by order dated 12-7-1999, by directing the respondent No,1 to dispose of the appeal/review petition filed by the petitioner. The respondent No,1 dismissed the appeal/review petition of the petitioner, by order dated 31-7-1999. Therefore, the petitioner filed another Writ Petition No, 14908. The same was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, by order dated 29-9-1999. Intra-Court appeal filed by him was also dismissed by a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court by impugned judgment dated 18- 10-1999.
3. The petitioner submitted that the respondent No,1, being a Deputy Commissioner, was also an Ex- officio Chairman, Board of Governors of Kasur Public School. Therefore, the order passed by the respondent No,1 of termination of the petitioner from service was amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. It was further argued that the view taken by the High Court to the contrary was not reflective of the correct legal and Constitutional position as held by this Court in the case of Aitchison College, Lahore through its Principal v. Muhammad Zubair and others (PLD 2002 SC 326).
4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents contended that the Kasur Public School was a non-statutory body having no statutory rules of service of its employees. Therefore, the petitioner was governed by the law of 'master and servant for which the writ jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution was not attracted.
5. We have heard the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents at length. Admittedly, the Kasur Public School was registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. Its employees are not governed by any statutory rules of service. It was riot shown that the income derived or expenditure incurred by the school formed part of the provincial consolidated fund or public exchequer. Merely because the Deputy Commissioner of the District was also an Ex-officio Chairman of the Board of Governors of the School could not be a sure basis for treating it to be a Government institution. The precedent case of Aitchison College, Lahore (supra) relied on by the petitioner is distinguishable from the present one. In the said case, it was found that the Board of Governors of the said College exercised its powers vested in it by the provisions of a Martial Law Order No,86 of 1961 (M.L.A. Zone B). Therefore, the same was treated to be a body performing its functions in connection with the affairs of the Province. Reference may by made to the case of Sabhajit Teweary v. Union of India and others (AIR 1975 SC 1329) in which the Supreme Court of India in the context of the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 observed as under:-- "The society does not have a statutory character like the Oil and Natural Gas Commission, or the Life Insurance Corporation or Industrial Finance Corporation. It is a society incorporated in accordance with the provisions of the societies Registration Act. The fact that the Prime Minister is the President or that the Government appoints nominees to the Governing Body , or that the Government may terminate the membership will not establish anything more than the fact that the Government takes special care that the promotion, guidance and co-operation of scientific and industrial research the institution and financing of specific researches, establishment or development and assistance to special institutions, or departments of the existing institutions for scientific study of problem affecting particular industry in a trade, the utilization of the result of the researches conducted under the auspices of the Council towards the development of industries in the country and carried out in a responsible manner.
5. This Court has held in Praga Tools Corporation v. C.B. Imanual (1969) 3 SCR 773 = (AIR 1969 SC 1306) Heavy Engineering Mazdoor Union v. State of Bihar (1969) 3 SCR 995 = (AIR 1970 SC 82) and in S.L. Agarwal v. General Manger, Hindustan Steel Ltd. (1970) 3 SCR. 363 = (AIR 1970 SC -1150) that the Praga Tools Corporation, Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd. And Hindustan Steel Ltd, are all companies incorporated under the companies Act and the employees of these companies do not enjoy the protection available to Government servants as contemplated in Article 311. The companies were held in those cases to have existence independent of the Government and by the law relating to corporations. These could not be held to be departments of the Government."
6. The Lahore High Court justifiably refused to interfere in the matter by taking the view that the school of the respondents was a non-statutory body and there were no statutory rules of service of its employees.
7. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in this petition- and the.Same is dismissed accordingly. 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.