RIZWANA BIBI Versus GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA through Chief Secretary, Civil Secretariat Peshawar
ROOH-UL-AMIN KHAN, J .---Through this common judgment, we propose to decide the instant writ petition as well as connected petitions, as identical question of law and fact is involved therein. Besides, one and the same writ has been sought by the petitioners to the effect that orders /Notifications issued by the respondents with regard to termination of their services against various posts in different Working Folks Grammar Schools and Institutes of the Province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, be declared as illegal, unlawful and without lawful authority and respondents be directed to adjust/ re-instate and regularize them in the service forthwith. Particulars of the connected writ petitions are:-
1. Writ Petition No.6467-P/2019
"Mst. Farzana Khan v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
2. Writ Petition No.732-P/2019
"Imran Ullah Wazir and others v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
3. Writ Petition No.7215-P/2019
"Mehran Khan v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
4. Writ Petition No.7123-P/2019
"Fawad Ahmad v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
5. Writ Petition No.5458-P/2019
"Mst. Abida Bibi v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
6. Writ Petition No.5045-P/2019
"Manzoor Khan v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
7. Writ Petition No.4374-P/2019
"Qismat Ali v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
8. Writ Petition No.3657-P/2019
"Shabnam Bibi v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
9. Writ Petition No.2778-P/2019
"Sher Alam Khan v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
10. Writ Petition No.4501-P/2019
"Gulab Nawaz v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
11. Writ Petition No.2463-P/2019
"Hidayat Ullah Khan v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
12. Writ Petition No.2127-P/2019
"Attiq ur Rehman v Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
13. Writ Petition No.1975-P/2019
"Hayat Ullah v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
14. Writ Petition No.1665-P/2020
"Abdul Wadood v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
15. Writ Petition No.1450-P/2020
"Abdul Ali v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
16. Writ Petition No.1379-P/2020
"Shah Faisal and others v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
17. Writ Petition No.804-P/2020
"Miss Mehnaz Begum and others v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
18. Writ Petition No.2560-P/2020
"Mst. Sameen Gul v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
19. Writ Petition No.2069-P/2020
"M. Saleem and others v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
20. Writ Petition No.1947-P/2020
"Khalid Khan and others v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
21. Writ Petition No.1931-P/2020
"Dost Muhammad Khan v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
22. Writ Petition No.1930-P/2020
"Sakhi Multan and others v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
23. Writ Petition No.440-P/2020
"Dil Nawaz Khan v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
24. Writ Petition No.1929-P/2020
"Azmat Ali v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
25. Writ Petition No.1928-P/2020
"Faheem Qutab and others v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
26. Writ Petition No.1926-P/2020
"Nasir Begum v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
27. Writ Petition No.6037-P/2019
"Asad Khan v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Labour/Chairman Workers Welfare Board, Peshawar and others".
2. Precise facts forming the background of the writ petitions are that petitioners were appointed by the respondents against various posts in different Working Folks Grammar Schools and Technical Institutes in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa on contract basis. Grievance of the petitioners is that through the impugned Notifications/orders (mentioned and referred in each writ petition), their services were terminated by the respondents without any rhyme and reason, hence, these writ petitions.
3. It appears from the appointment orders of the petitioners that their services were purely on contract basis, which have been terminated through the impugned orders/notifications. The impugned orders / notifications depict that services of some of the petitioners have been terminated on expiry of their contract or due to some other reasons i.e. some of them were overage, at the time of appointment, some have remained absent from duties without due permission of the authority while testimonials of some of the petitioners were found fake by the Board. Similarly, some of the petitioners have been restrained from their duties by the respondents on verbal directions as their contractual period has already been expired.
4. Be that as it may, this fact cannot be denied that petitioners in all the writ petitions were the contractual employees of the respondents Workers Welfare Board; as such relation between them was that of master and servant. Before the instant writ petitions, contractual employees of the Workers Welfare Board, whose services were also terminated by the respondents, filed different writ petitions before this Court which were allowed through a consolidated judgment dated 04.10.2017, consequently, the respondents were directed to re-instate petitioners of the writ petitions in the service. Against the judgment (supra) of this Court, the respondents filed Civil Petitions Nos.4504 to 4576, 4588 and 4589 of 2017, before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which were allowed vide consolidated judgment/order dated 08.01.2018, consequently, the judgment dated 04.10.2017 of this court was set aside and the writ petitions of the petitioners were dismissed. For the sake of convenience and ready reference, operative part of the judgment (supra) of the august apex Court is reproduced below:-
"Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we find that contractual employees have no right to be regularized until there is a law provided to that effect and we are not confronted with any such legal proposition. They are the contractual employees and they have to serve till the pleasure of their master and in case of any wrongful termination, which according to them has taken place, they cannot seek the reinstatement. At the best, they can only have the compensation for the wrongful termination by applying to the competent Court of law. Resultantly, these petitions are converted into appeals and allowed and the impugned judgment is set aside."
(emphasis supplied).
5. The judgment (supra) was upheld by the Hon'ble Apex court in Civil Review Petitions Nos.61 to 96 and 88 to 91 and 91 and Suo Motu No.69 of 2018.
6. The matter of contractual employees of the Workers Welfare Board once again came up before the august Supreme Court of Pakistan in C.P. No.73 of 2020, titled, "Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Workers Welfare Board through its Chairman v. Raheel Ali Gohar and others" decided on 16.07.2020, wherein while dilating upon the rights of the contractual employees, the Hon'ble apex court held as under:-
"In additional to these issues, we also find ourselves at odds with the fact that the present Respondents approached the High Court in its writ jurisdiction to seek regularization without there being any law conferring a right that may have been denied and was sought to be enforced by way of a petition under Article 199 of the Constitution. It is settled law that as contractual employees, the relationship between the Respondents and the Appellant is governed by the principle of master and servant. In these circumstances, the Respondents did not have the right to approach the High Court to seek redressal of their grievance relating to regularization. As noted above, in case of a contractual dispute the Respondents could have sought appropriate redressal of their grievance before a competent court of law. However, only by virtue of being contract employees, no automatic right of regularization has accrued in their favour. In this regard, reference may also be made to the judgment of this Court in Chairman NADRA Islamabad and another v Muhammad Ali Shah and others (2017 SCMR 1979)."
7. Case of present petitioners are at par with that of other employees the Workers Welfare Board, whose plea for re-instatement and regularization has already been turned down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgments (supra). In view of clear decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this and the connected Writ Petition along with CMs stand dismissed. However, the petitioners would be at liberty to seek their other remedy in accordance with law, before the proper forum.
SA/38/P Petitions dismissed.