2010 GBLR 106

PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary Northern Areas Gilgit Versus MUBEEN KHAN Advocate-General

Citation2010 GBLR 106

CourtSupreme Appellate Court Gilgit Baltistan

Judge(s)Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, C. J., Syed Jaffar Shah and Muhammad Yaqoob

ORDER

1. This petition has been directed against the order dated 27-5-2009 passed by the Chief Court, in a writ petition filed by the private respondent a Nursing Assistant wherein he challenged the termination of his service as illegal. The writ petition succeeded and Chief Court issued direction for reinstatement of private respondent in service.

2. The learned Advocate-General has contended that private respondent was a contract employee and on expiry of extended period of contract his service stood terminated, therefore, he had no cause of action or locus standi to file a writ petition before the Chief Court on the subject. Learned Advocate-General added that in any case contractual obligation cannot be challenged in writ petition, and that impugned order was passed in improper exercise of jurisdiction and without due consideration of the above question.

3. Having heard the learned Advocate-General and perused the record with his assistance, we find that the question relating to the contractual obligation was not as such taken in the comments submitted in the writ petition, rather it was orally raised before the Chief Court, which was rejected. The initial appointment of respondent on contract was made in 2005, which continued till the termination of last extended period of contract and evidently the orders regarding extension of contract of respondent passed from time to time would create an impression that competent authority intended to absorb him as a regular employee but due to the intervention of advisor neither further order of his continuation in service was passed nor he was informed about the termination of his contract.

4. In view thereof, we without commenting on the question relating to further retention of respondent in service or interfering in the order of Chief Court, dispose of this petition with the observation that the competent authority without prejudice to the right of respondent may in the light of departmental practice and procedure proceed strictly in accordance with law. Disposed of.

5. M.H./19/Glt. Order accordingly.