FASIH AZHAR vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Resources, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad and 2 others

' RIAZ AHMAD KHAN, J.--- This judgment is directed to dispose of Writ Petition No,4723 of 2010.

2. Brief facts constituting the background of present writ petition are that the petitioner was appointed on contract basis as Executive Director (H.R.) in OGDCL on 24-8-2009 for a term of three years. The services of the petitioner were terminated vide order dated 30th June, 2010. Feeling aggrieved of the order of termination, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the termination of the petitioner was in violation of terms of agreement, as the petitioner had been appointed for a fixed period of three years and prior to expiry of said period, the services of the petitioner could not be terminated. It was also contended that the termination was in violation of the principle of natural justice, as no opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioner and similarly no show-cause notice was issued to him. Lastly, it was contended that the order was mala fide, as the reason for issuance of order was that the petitioner had pointed out certain irregularities in the department. In addition to that, the petitioner had challenged the illegal appointment of G.M. (HR) being in violation of service rules. As a result, M.D. Had personal grudge against the petitioner and at the end, termination order of the petitioner was passed.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents contended that the petitioner was appointed on contract basis and in contractual obligations writ cannot be issued. It was further contended that the order of termination was without any stigma and therefore, no cause of action had accrued to the petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted that the allegations levelled by the petitioner require recording of evidence, which is outside the ambit of writ jurisdiction.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.

6. Admitted position in the present case is that the petitioner had been appointed on contract basis and in contractual obligations no writ can be issued. The order of termination is without any stigma and therefore, the same cannot be challenged. Factual controversy cannot be resolved in writ jurisdiction. In these circumstances, instant writ petition is not maintainable and the same is accordingly, dismissed.