KHALID JAVED BABES REGIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, ISLAMABAD Versus REGIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, ISLAMABAD

1. SYED ALLY MADAD SHAH (CHAIRMAN). ‑‑‑Both the appeals are of identical nature. They have been heard simultaneously. They are decided by this one judgment.

2. Both the appellants were appointed as Income Tax Inspector, Peshawar Zone, Peshawar: The appellant Mr. Khalid Javed Babar (Appeal No.469 (P)/90) was appointed, as such, vide appointment order No. C‑2(7)89 90/982/Adorn., dated 10‑9‑1989, issued from the office of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Peshawar Zone, Peshawar. Appellant Mr. Muhammad Qureshi Khan (Appeal No. 470 (P)/90) likewise was appointed vide office order No. C‑2(7)89.90/223/Admn, dated 19‑7‑1989. Their services were terminated under separate orders dated 24‑9‑1990 issued by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Peshawar Zone, Peshawar. Except the name of each of them in the respective orders of termination of their service, the text of the orders was the same and is reproduced below:

ORDER

2. Subject: IRREGULAR APPOINTMENTS TERMINATION OF

SERVICE OF AD HOC APPOINTEES

3. Services of (Mr ----name‑‑‑) Inspector (Ad hoc) Office of the T.R.O. Range‑I Peshawar are terminated w.e.f. 9‑10‑1990 (F.N.) being no longer required. This may please be treated as 14 days notice commencing from 25‑9‑1990 to 8‑10‑1990. He was recruited on ad hoc basis as recommended by the Placement Bureau.

4. This order is being issued under the instructions of Central Board of Revenue, Islamabad contained in letter No. 6 (10)/90. DTA.9, dated 20‑9‑1990.

5. (SD.)

MUHAMMAD IQBAL KHAN

6. Commissioner of Income‑tax

7. Peshawar Zone, Peshawar."

8. After rejection of their respective departmental appeals as per separate letters dated 20‑10‑1990, both the appellants filed these appeals on 15‑11‑1990.

3. The appellants have assailed the orders of termination of their service on the grounds that they were appointed as Inspectors Income Tax by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Peshawar Zone, Peshawar, whereas their services were terminated under the instructions of the Central Board of Revenue, who was not their appointing authority; and secondly that they were appointed during the regime of the Pakistan People's Party through the Placement Bureau and after the replacement of that Government, the successor Government issued general instructions that the cases of the appointments made during the predecessor regime should be reviewed and the service of the qualified and eligible persons from Grade 1 to 15 should be regularised and services of those appointees who did not possess the minimum prescribed qualifications or were not eligible otherwise, should be terminated and they came in the category of those appointees whose services were to be regularised and yet orders of termination of their service were issued arbitrarily.

4. The respondents have contested the appeals and contended that the appointments of the appellants were made through the Placement Bureau during the PPP regime in violation of the relevant rules and their cases were duly reviewed and their services could not be regularised and hence the orders of termination of their services were made as a matter of policy of the Government at the time.

5. The impugned order of termination of service of the appellants, the text of which has been reproduced above, bears out that the orders were issued under the instructions of Central Board of Revenue contained in letter No.6(10)/90.DTA.9, dated 20‑9‑1990, which is reproduced below:‑

GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN

CENTRAL BOARD OF REVENUE

9. C. No. 6(10)/90.DTA.9 Islamabad, the 20th Sep. 1990

10. From:

11. Mr. Ejaz Ilahi Piracha,

12. Secretary (DTA).

13. To,

14. The Regional Commissioner of Income Tax,

15. Northern Zone, Peshawar.

16. Subject: IRREGULAR APPOINTMENTS:

17. Cabinet in cases No. 232/19/90, dated 8‑8‑1990, No. 238/10/90, dated 12‑8‑1990, and No. 278/24/90, dated 10‑9‑1990 decided that all appointments made in executive position irrespective of grades in F.I.A., Norcotics Control, Customs, Excise and Taxation, Security Agencies etc. should be reviewed and services of all persons who do not fulfil the educational qualifications or in whose cases condition of age has been relaxed for more than five years should be terminated. Necessary review has been made and it has been decided with the approval of the Minister for Finance and Economic Affairs and Planning and Development that services of M/s. Fawad Haider, Muhammad Quraish and Khalid Javed Babar, Inspectors of Income Tax, should be terminated immediately subject to the check whether any appointee is an ex‑serviceman and, there for entitled to relaxation in age. It has further been decided that pay in lieu of notice may be allowed to them if the same is admissible under the rules. Action accordingly may please be taken, under intimation to the Board.

18. (SD.)

19. Ejaz Ilahi Piracha,

20. Secretary (DTA).

21. Copy‑forwarded to Commissioner of Income Tax, Peshawar.

22. (SD.)

23. EJAZ ILLAHI PIRACHA,

24. Secretary (LTA).

25. The aforesaid letter seems to have been issued on the basis of letter No.6(10)/90‑Dt‑9(Pt), dated the 15th September, 1990', from the Central Board of Revenue to the Secretary, Finance and Minister for Finance, reproduced below:‑‑

26. "No. 6(10)/90‑Dt‑9(Pt)

GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN

CENTRAL BOARD OF REVENUE

27. Islamabad, the 15th September, 1990.

28. Subject: IRREGULAR APPOINTMENTS.

29. Reference Ministry of Finance's d.o. F.8(12)‑Admn.l/90, dated 12th September, 1990 on the above‑subject (Annex‑A).

2. All the appointments made in Income Tax Department during previous Government have been reviewed in the light of the Cabinet Division at Annex‑B. No one has been recruited in the Department in relaxation of prescribed educational requirements. However, in case of following officials, relaxation of more than five years in their age was given:‑

30. S. No.

31. Name

32. Designation

33. 1.

34. Syed Hafeezuddin.

35. Inspector (B‑11)

36. 2.

37. Mr. Yashaullah Sheikh.

38. ‑do

39. 3.

40. Mr. Fawad Haider.

41. ‑do‑

42. 4.

43. Mr. Muhammad Qurash

44. ‑do‑

45. 5.

46. Mr. Khalid Javed Babar.

47. ‑do -

48. 6.

49. Syed Irshad Ali.

50. UDC (B‑7)

51. 7.

52. Mr. Muhammad Iqbal.

53. LDC (B‑5)

54. 8.

55. Mst. Soofia Noor

56. ‑do -

57. 9

58. Mr. Muhkamuddin Khalid.

59. ‑do

60. 10.

61. Mr. Akbar Khan.

62. Driver (B‑4)

63. 11.

64. Mr. Gul Badshah.

65. Daftari (B‑2)

66. 12.

67. Mr. Sheikh Muhammad.

68. Naib‑Qasid (B‑1)

69. 13.

70. Mr. Mohan Dhan Ji

71. ‑do‑

72. 14.

73. Mr. Muhammad Arif

74. ‑do‑

3. Orders of the Minister for Finance to the termination of the services of abovementioned officials are solicited, in terms of Establishment Division's D.O. No. 1/1/90‑DS(CP), dated 27‑8‑90 (Annex‑C).

75. (SD.)

AHADULLAH AKMAL

76. Chairman"

77. It would appear from the last letter dated 15‑9‑1990, reproduced above, that the services of the appellant were terminated only on the ground of relaxation of their age for more than five years, otherwise they did not suffer from any other disqualification. No doubt, there were directions that the services of the persons appointed on the recommendation of the Placement Bureau in relaxation of the age beyond five years were to be terminated, but there is letter dated 7‑8‑1990 from the Second Secretary, Central Board of Revenue, to the Commissioner of Income Tax, Peshawar in the folder (at page 32) filed by the departmental representative and tagged with the file of Appeal No.469 (P)/90 filed by the appellant Khalid Javed Babar, that there were instructions from the Establishment Division vide No.7/13/89‑AB, dated 9‑4‑1989 that competent authority may relax age upto ten years regarding nominees of the Placement Bureau. It appears that the relaxation of age upto five years was based on the earlier orders and the order of the Establishment Division dated 9‑4‑1989 providing for relaxation of age upto ten years was not placed before the competent authority for consideration. In the case of the appellants, relaxation in age was allowed on the basis of the Establishment Division letter dated 9‑4‑1989. In the circumstances, the service of the appellants were not liable to have been terminated only on the ground that there had been relaxation in their age beyond five years and they were entitled to the processing of their cases for regularisation of their service in accordance with the rules as a matter of general policy laid down by the Cabinet.

6. The appeals are accordingly allowed, for the reasons recorded above, to the extent that the cases of the appellants may be processed for, regularisation of their services in accordance with the rules, but without benefit of their reinstatement in service unless they qualify for the regularisation of their services under due process. No order is made for costs.

78. H.B.T./765/Sr.F Appeals allowed.