Shaikh Rashid Vs Govt

JUDGMENT SIIEil'i'

PI'SIIAWAIT H I(; H COU ITT. AItI}OTTAI}A I) I} I.] N CI I .l u l)ICIAt, l)IiPAR]'M I,.N't'

Writ l'ctition No.979-A of 2015

.IUD(;MENT

l)t.tt c of h(ur itll 25 09.2018

(Shcikh llushitl.l h:- Mt. ()vtti.s Khutt lclvotalc.........

)le slxtntfunt(s1 ...(()otarnmenl ol Khyb(v l'ukltttt ttkhtnt through ('hie/ Sct:relury ctc).. hr ll''S l?ul,t iVluhtrntntutl Zubuir. l.'1O'rru.l \'luhttntntrrtl Shouih Khun,.4Llt'ott{tc . .. .

SY TtD IvTUHAMMAI) A'r1'rQLiL, sltAll. ,l 'I'hroLrgh tiris sir-rglc juclgrncnt, tLris Cloufl shail rlisposc o1' lour w'it politions. havinll colrllllolr qucsl.ior-l o1' law and Iacts involvcd thcrcin ii-rc piuliculai':j olthc writ pctitions arr: lr's ttnilcr:

(i)Writ Pctition No'979-A/2UI5 Shcikh Itashid Vs. Vicc (]tivt of KI'K ctc'

(ii)Writ Pctition No.l012-Arl(|i5 Asirt {}ultar ctc Vs. (}ovt of Kl}K ctc'

(iii)Writ Pctition No.l0tt2-Ai2()15 l{an* llilal ctc Vs. (lo'rt of Kl)K ctr:'

(ii,)Writ Pctition No'i185-n/2017 tmran ctc Vs. (iovt of KPi/r" etc'

i

1 Ilricl' lac1s lcacling to liiing o1' thcsc writ pctitions arc thal in all thc lbur writ pctitiorrs, pctrtr olrcl's afc cmployccs o{' I lazara lJnivcrsitl,.

I)hoclial appointcd on contract basis against dil'I'crcnt posLs and arc rcndcring thcir scrviccs llt \ af toLls dcparLmcnts and thcir contract has bccn cxtcndcd by thc [.Jn ivcrsity/rcspondcnls lirrm tin-rc to tin-rc alicr' cxpiry o['thcir initial conlract. 'l'hc pctitioncrs havc pla,u.'cc1 lbr rcgulalization o1' thcir scrviccs In accordancc u,'ith law

l 'l'hc rcspondcnts WCI'C put to nolicc,

rvho {ilcd thcir parawisc colnmcnts. whcrcin. thcy dcnicd thc right ol' thc pctitioncrs on various lcgal and l'actual issucs and contcstcd thc wlit pctitions.

1 Lcarncd counscl lor thc rcsponclcnts.

whilc raisin-e prclirrinary objcction, a[ thc' oul.so1, submittcd thal thcsc writ pctitions arc not n.r aintair"ral-.lc. ir-r vicw of scction 41 ol' thc [Jnivcrsitics Act. 2015, and dccision o{' I Ion'b]c Apcx (iourt rcndcrccl in (l ivil l'}ctitions No.,1504 to 45'.76. 45tltt and 45t19 of 2017 titlcd 'lVorkars llet/hre lloutl, KPK Vs. Nemutullnlr erc' dccidc(l on 08.0 | .201U.

t

5 Argumcnls ol lcarncd counscl firr thc pctitioncrs and lcarncd AA(l and counscl lirr [Jnivcrsity rcspondcnt hcard ancl rccurcl pcruscd u,it.h thcir ablc assislanr:r'.

6 So l'ar as thc plcliminaly objcction ol' thc lcspondcnts rcgarding maintainability ol' writ pctitions is conccrncd, in this rcgarcl this (lourt tr-i casc titlccl 'l'-trmanulltrh Vs. Gomtl lJniversily D.l.

Khun ond others' (l'l,C 2lll7 CS Notc l16) ha:r rcsolvcd this issuc in thc lbllowing manr'lcr.

"T-he petitioners are sert,ing in thc respondenls university in the cupucity o./ contruct/fixetl paid entploT'ees. I'ltc lefinition us given in the Civil Servunts Acl, 1973 or lhe Service 'l-rihunal y'cl, 1974, excludes the contracl or tluily wuges emplol)ees or those who ure puirl Jrom contingencies. Besidcs lh is question needs no elahorution hectusc thc upex Court in Muheen's cusc (PLD 2006 sc 602 resolved lhis conlrovcrs.t' hy holtling tltul sfuttus o/ ltaing in scrvir:e tt Pukistun connol conJbrred hy dccming clttuse or h1t inserling rt seclion in uny lttw. Thc Gomul Ilniversity is u creotion tf Stutute, its Syndicute/Senole hos heen empowered trt ./brmulute its r ules/slutttles, kt he upprot,ei by lhe Chuncellor (()ttverrutr of' I{l'K), lherelbre, tltesa rulas ura stututory und lhe Gomol 1J 11iv11v5il.v will bc consicleretl (r.s stultttor'1' ltorl.l' Section 4l o.f the KP Universilies Act, 2012, if exonrined in the light of lesls prcscribetl in lhe irulgment o.f the tpex Courl (supru), u,e ./ind thll thc i

petilioners connot he hekl us ciyil servonls fbr the purpose oJ Sert,ice Tribunul 4cl, 1974 und tlte-y ltuve rightl.y upprouched th is Court."

1 . In vicw o1' abovc, wc hold that tl.rc status o[' thc prcscnl pctitioncrs bcing contract crr-rployccs ol thc respondcnts/univcrsity is at par rvith thc curployccs o1'(iorr-ral [Jn ivcrs ity/pctitior.rcls in albrcmcnlioncd casc, thcrclbrc,, tl'rc argumcnls o1' thc lcarncd counscl fol thc rcspondcnts with rcspcct to maintainability ol writ pctitions has no fbrcc anc] wc hold that thc sarlc arc maintainablc. Mt>rcovcr, thc juclgmcnt ol thc august Apcx Clourt datccl 0t1.0 1.2018, rcl'crrcd to abovc, rclicd upon by thc rcspondcnls bcing dislinguishablc is also no1 epplicublc to thc I'acts ttl prcscnt nctiti()rrs.

It. l)crusal of rccord would rcvcal that pctitioncrs rvcrc initially appointcd on conttact basis lbr six months in thc ycar, 201 4 against various 'l caching posts, such as Assistanl I)ircctor, lcclurcs, Assistants, Assistants, Librarians, Accountants, tJ I)Cs. l.l)Cs, Sub lrnginccrs, l)rivcrs, Naib Qasicls ctc at'rd sincc tl-rcn thcy havc bccn pcllirrming thcir dul-ics with thc rcspondcr-r1s and thcir contracts wcrc also cxtcnrlcd lhlr-r timc to tilnc, howcvcr, thcir'

I

-i

scrviccs wcrc no1 rcgulalizcd dcspitc availability ol' sanctioncd posls, budgct and dccision o['synclicatr:

o['thc rcspondcnts/un ivcrsily in this rcgarcl. Apart fiorn thc abovc, thc rcspondcnts havc not clisputcd thc pcrlbrmancc of thc pctitioncrs in any manncr' r,r"h:rtst>cvcr. rncaning thcrcby that thcy havc bccn lcndcrir-rg lhcil scrviccs to thc salislirction ol'thc tjr.rivcr"sity authorilics. l'hc lcgal proposition involvccl in thc prcscnt pctitions has bccn rcsolvccl in a rcccnt judgrncnt o1- I Ion'blc Apcx C)ourt ir-r casc tiLlcd " llourd ol Intermediute und Secorulury Iitlttcution, F-uisalubutl through Cltuirmon un olhcrs. Vs.'l-untteer Suiid ond othars'(20lti SCMIt 1405) and alicr thorough discussion, thc august Apcx Oourl has hcld that:

"6, lt muy he notetl tltot tlte superior Courts have ulwol's condenuta tha pructit'e o/ keeping the emplo.vcas otr lemporat.y hosis./itr long peritxls ol lime v,ithotrt confirming or regultriTing tlrcir services. lt hos been held thal un emplo.l'ee being .iohless and itt.fbur ol' baing slrotvtt the dottr hus tto oplion hrtl to uccepl nnd ctttttinue tlitlt the nppointnrcnt on wlttlever lerms u.ioh is olf'erett b1, tha employer. In lircl such {:onsent to cotttinue to work tts temqorur! emplol,gt! is not itt the truture of .fiec co senl between the emltktyees, on lha one ltrrntl tnd employers ttn lha olhcr-,'l person so employed is itt tto Posilion lo burgain tuilh lhc emploltcrs/deP( rltllctt !\ thich rc itr u disproporlittttnlcll' doninating hnrguittittg posilion (rr

t

u)mpore to llte employee and lhe cmployer could alwuys coerce llrem lo wuive lhcir legal pntteclion und o{(.ept, .'ontrocluol lernts or .face the risk of Iosing tlteir johs. [see: Ilubihulluh v. (iovernment oJ the l,un.j(h (PLl) 1980 l-nh. 37), l\tkistun v. I,uhlit at l.arg( (PLD 1987 SC 304) and Sui Southern Gas Companl' I-ttl. tt. (ihulant ,4hl)(s

(PLD 2003 SC 724)1.

7.'l'his Courl itr lhe tusa of Dr. lntttr ,4li Snhto v. l.-ederotiott el Pokistutt (PLD 2002 SC l0l), hel that erctt (onlrocl emploleas could ltc rcinsloled in service in nppropriole cuses i/ :;uch uppointment had ltetoma permonent hy elJlux oJ time. ,4 similut view wts taken in the case titled os ,4htlul Sultur v. Sui Norlheru Grls I'ipelines l.initel (2001 SCMR 1935). In tlrc cuse o/ lkrunt Rari v. Ndiottul llunk o/ I'tkistan (2005 SCMR I l0) thc Court 4/ier rell-ittg upon the ttJbra-nolctl .judgntent held lhal parsons, wlto hotc served./br more lhan threa yeurs, willutul n brauk of more than l5 days, ure anlillcl t o rt,q u I u ri z.trI i rttt o/ I h e ir :ert' it r'.s.

In thc samc judgrncnt, thc augusl Apcx Court has Iurthcl obscrvcd thal:

In lhe cuse o./ lijaz Akhar Kusi v. Ministry oJ lnfbrmation un llntndcustittg (PLD 201 I SC 22), utntrutt emplo-yecs d Pl'V Corporulirttt tvhrt npproached this ()ourt Jbr regulurizlttiotr of lheir services on lhe ground tlttt lhe.1: hutl norked fbr many lears on contrutl husis, thereJbre, deservetl lo he utnsidered .for regularizoliotl, were direclad to he regulorizc . The revictv patition Jiled ogoittsl the suid.judgmcrtl wos lismissed. ln thc crtsc o/ l'ir lmrurt St1jitt v. Munaging Dircclor/{ienarul 14utttgar (Manager l"inancc)'l'clephrtttt: lndustries ttJ. I\tkistan (2015 S(.-,Vli 1257) lhis ('ourt held us under:- "6. AdmittetllY, ull tlte tppclltttt'; hutt btttt s<'trin 3 TI lt in their resPet:tive

t

pqsitiotl since (boul last mora tlr0n twelve (12) leors, though on conlract bosis, howaver, rencwul o/ tlt tir t't tlt'tt ls .ru -t,(ot. lt, .l\\tr busis sittcc tlrc in ceptiort clearl! shows that lhe nalnrc q{ their .joh:/d nrits ir l)(rnm ( t ttntl nol tu.yuul ttr lempqror!, ond thal the oppellonts ltuye bee n 1tL,r'/irning th rir Jhttctions/dulies lo lhe sutislitctiqn q/ their amplolter and ./furlher tlt0l lhroughoul tha whole period lheir services were req uired, ond ltave rennined use/i .for an bene/itial lo lha org(nizalion. Tlterc is ttry ullagutirlt of ony miscotttlucl ot incqnpelence ago itrsl lhe uppelloltts, ralhcr lhey lnvt: been gronted incremcnls ./rom tine to lime. Il hus nlso nol lteen, and indeed, in lhe ./hcls und lhe circuntstunces o.f llrc cuse, coukl nol have heen, cluimed thol the po.tts held by tha uppellants tn the tnrk corried oul h1'lhant tt,us 0/ tt temp0r(r-y tt0lure-

9.It is nottt well esloblishel, lhul righl n li/e as envisnged lr.t ,4rtit le L,.1 llt( ( ottstilutiurt. itttlrttlts lhr right to liveliltrx anl ts loid down in lhc cost: tt/ Ahtlul llahub (supru), thc "rigltt l(, liwlihuxl. therelitre, connot lmng on tu) the Jancies ttJ intlit,itluuls in utlr\ril.t'." ('rrtuinl;, n.r ht: .ffurthar been hell in the suid .jrulgment; "il sholl unmisloknbly he Parmissibla thot the entltloyment ol un cmployae tun he brought lrt un end, hut obviousllt irt nctordnnce tvith lutt", whareos in tlte Prascnt cusa, untl ts ttbserYed curliitr,

ll

lhere was/is no .justi/it:ution JUr nol nruking lh eir cntploynettt p(rn,|n( 1, ttnl .fir keeping their entirc (or((r, rulher livt'lihtn cxposed and susceptible lo the whims of lhe uutlutrities, which trlso lrurts lhc ignil.l' o/ lha uppellanls."

'l hc august Apcr Oourt. whilc discussing mclits o1'thc czrst:

ol thc cnrplovccs o1'thc IllSlr has ur.rcrluivocalll, hcld cntitlc.l thcnr to bc rcgu)arizcd in scrvicc in thc Iollowing tcrms.

8.'l'urning to tlte instunl tnsc, thc respondenls-emplo)tees htve been working with the petitioner-RlSlis Jbr u long pcriorl of time ronging hetvteen 3 to l2 years, us menlioned in llte intpugncl .judgments hy the learned lligh Court. Though they were initiulllt oppointel ./br u period of 89 tlo.ys hut ttler the expi4' rf suid pcriod, tlreir contracts wera ranewei fittn tinrc to tine.f'or./furlher periods rl l|9 rltt1,5 111 t lime with on wtiJiciol bratk of l or more days. It seems thol lltc nolivc heh ind such trtiliciol hreok v,u.r lo rtvrtil regulorizution ol their ttt'vit't'\ ott thc pretext tltut they were n01 t:ortlitt Lutusllt iu service. Sinca lhe respondents were in service ./br a long time, it clearly shotps that the posts thc)' were occupling )lere perntunenl itt tttttura untl ttttt cusuttl or lenporar)'. Il ./hrther indicutes that the services o/ rcsponrlettls were not only required hrtl ulso beneficiol to the depurtmenl an llr l they (respondertts) had been perJorming lheir luties with due tliligence to lhc vtisfictiotr of the (uthorilies. Nrtting hus ltutt plut'erl on the reutrtl that may shuv rnylhing lo lhe cqntr(r!.

I0. ln view of lhe ohove, we orc of lhe t,icw thnt the leurned IIigh Crturt hls rightl.t, directetl tlte petitioner' R lSlis/Government ttJ l'uniab to regularize lhe services ol resporulent- employces. 7'hus, no cosc.for inlerfercnt'c in lhc intpugne irulgnrcnts is mudc rtttt' 'l lrcsa petilitttts ure ucutrtlittgl.y iismisse uni lcnve kt uPPenl is refhsad."

'l'l-rc samc vicw has also bccn takcn by thc august Apcx (loLrlt in anothcr casc titlcd 'llounl o/ Inlermcdiale ond Sccondury Educulion, DG I(hun und unothar Vs. Muhummad ,lhuf tnd ollters' (20r8 scMrt 32s).

(). lt is also cvidcnt liom rccord o[' thc casc tlrat thc maltcl ol- contract cmployccs/pctitioncrs wcrc placcd bclorc thc Syndicatc ol'lla't.ara lJnivcrsity, which in its me cting hcld on 06.07.201 5 rccommcndcd {br cxtcnsion ol- thcit' contract lot' lurthcr pcriod o[' six months and thc lJnivcrsity Managcmcnt was dircctcd to llnalizc thc nrattcr ol' rcgularization ol' thc pctitioncrs through Sclcctiorr lloard/Sclcction Committcc. I lowcvcr, lhc rcspondcnts-l-lnivcrsily havc madc no c l'forls towards rcgularization ol'thc contl'act scrviccs o{'thc pctitioncrs dcspitc thc lact that thc posts against whicl-r thcy wcre rendering thcir scrviccs wcrc pcnnancnt in naturc and thcy wcrc bcing paid lrcrn budgct allocatcd for thc said posts, which lact has also bccn highlightcd by thc Syndicatc in its albrcmcntioncd dccision.'l'hus, non-rcgularization of thc pctitioncrs by ttrc rcspondcnts indir:atcs t

t0

lowards thcir covcrt objcct and rnalafidc, which has alrvays bccn dcprccalcd by thc sr-rpcrior (loLrrts. In vicu, ol'thc lirrcgoing discussion, u,hcn this (-ou1l cxamincd thc cascs of tl'rc prcscnt pctitioncrs oir thc touchstonc o1'abovc mcntioncd dicta ol'thc I lon'blc august Slrprcrlc Court ol I'}akistan, it bccanrc clcar that thc rcspondcnts havc not tlcatcd tlrc pctitioncrs in accorclancc with law.

10.I'hr-rs, in vicw o['alorcurcntionccl aulhorilalivi' dccision ol'tl-rc augr-rst Apcx Court. this (lor-rrt rs pcrsuaclccl 1o lbllow lhc 'ralio decidendi' ol- lhc vcrclict bcir.rg absolutcly applicablc to thc casc o1'lhc pl'cscnt pctitioncrs. Accordingly, fbr thr: l'ciisons statcd hcrcinabovc, all thc lbur u,ril pctitions arc admittccl ancl allowcd and rcspondcnl.s arc dircctccl lo rcgularizc thc scrviccs o1- thc pclilioncrs ln accolclancc with law fiom thc datc ol- thcir initial appoinl-rncnt.

Announccd.

l)l.t I.10.201It. ., LJ t_

I l.Srlctn'/'

.t K( {l)tt) \lr. .l slicr l,al ,lAtr Khallik & }lr.,lusli.t S}cd \lt'lrntrrnrnd \tliqtre Shrr'