GOVERNMENT OF N.W.F.P. and others vs NAMROZ KHAN
The petitioners seek leave to appeal against the order of the N.-W.F.P. Service Tribunal dated 26-5-1988, which accepted the respondent's appeal, set aside his termination, and granted him back benefits. The respondent, initially appointed as a temporary cleaner in the FATA Forest Division, faced multiple absences from duty on medical and other grounds, ultimately leading to his termination from service by the Divisional Forest Officer after an unauthorized absence period. His departmental representations and appeals were rejected before he successfully approached the Service Tribunal. The core legal question concerns the validity of terminating a temporary employee's service without a formal detailed inquiry and whether such termination constituted a punishment requiring strict adherence to legal formalities. The Supreme Court held that the contentions raised by the petitioners require detailed examination. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal to examine the matter further on the existing record.
- Whether a temporary employee can be terminated from service without assigning reasons or notice?
- Does the termination of a temporary employee based on unauthorized absence constitute a punishment requiring a detailed inquiry?
- Are the findings of a Service Tribunal setting aside a termination order subject to examination by the Supreme Court under leave to appeal?
ORDER
1. ' UMSAN ALI SHAH, J.--Leave to appeal is being sought by the petitioners against the order of the N.- W.F.P. Service Tribunal, dated 26-5-1988.
2. ' The respondent was initially appointed as cleaner against a purely temporary vacancy on 15th October, 1980 in the FATA Forest Division, Peshawar. He had applied for 5 days leave w.e.f, 4-9-85 to 8-9-85. He extended the said leave twice for more 40 days on medical ground on production of a medical certificate alongwith his application. He reported to his duties on 22-10-1985. He again absented himself from duty from 1-1-86 to 23-3-86. He was referred to a Standing Medical Board for proper check up. The Board declared that the respondent was suffering from Schaze and opined that he is fit to continue in service subject to the treatment.
3. ' On 27-9-87 to 12-8-87 the respondent again absented himself from duty without giving any information to the authorities. On the basis of his absence, he was terminated from service by the D.F.O. His representation to the Conservator and subsequent appeal against his termination were rejected, vide order, dated 12-12-1987. He then went in appeal before the N.-W.F.P. Service Tribunal.
4. The learned Chairman and Member of the Tribunal accepted his appeal, set aside the order, dated 12-12-1987 of his termination and allowed him all the back benefits, vide impugned judgment.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners was heard in detail. He urged before us that the post of the respondent was purely on temporary basis, he could be terminated any time without assigning any reason or notice and his termination from service was not a punishment but in view of his own conduct he was so terminated. The learned counsel further urged that in view of his appointment letter he was not entitled to a detailed enquiry against him but in spite of that all legal formalities were observed while terminating his services. This fact was ignored by the learned Tribunal while accepting the appeal of the respondent.
6. ' We think that the question raised by the learned counsel in this petition requires examination of this Court. Leave to appeal is therefore granted.
7. ' The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with permission to the parties to file additional documents, if they so desire.