Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Case No. 151 of 1982, decided on 19th July, 1982.
‑‑S. 4 read with Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975‑Appointment in temporary capacity‑Termination of service‑Necessity of compliance of procedure under Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975‑Person appointed in temporary capacity with clear indication in appointment letter that services would be terminated without any notice if work found below standard and this would disentitle him to make grievance against termination during probation period‑Person remaining absent without application and her work and conduct not found satisfactory‑ Procedure laid down in Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975, held, not required‑ Termination of services, held further, can be made in accordance with terms and conditions laid down in appointment order.
Muhammad Sharif Sahi for Appellant.
Haroonur Rashid Cheema, District Attorney for Respondent.
MISS Sabiha Naz has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, in which she has impleaded the Director, Technical Education, Government of Punjab, Lahore and the Principal, R. S. L. N. Government Vocational Institute for Women, Edward Road, Lahore as respondents.
2. By virtue of ibis appeal she has prayed that the impugned order by which her services has been terminated be set aside and she be reinstated in service.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was appointed as Shop Attendant in R. S. L. N. Government Vocational Institute for Women vide appointment letter No. LN‑106/1524, dated 29th January, 1981. Her services were terminated when it was found that she was absent without leave and her performance during course of her duties was found not up to mark. The case is still at preliminary stage of hearing and in this respect we have perused parawise comments submitted by the department when called upon to do so by this Tribunal.
4. The fact of the matter that the appellant was appointed in temporary capacity with clear indication so given in her appointment letter that the services of the appellant would be terminated without any notice if it was found that her work was below standard and it will obviously, disentitle her to make any grievance about her such termination, during the probation period. Moreover, the appellant in this case remained absent for the period from 9th November, 1981 to 2nd December, 1981 and no application of leave was received from her. It.4 was further found that her work and conduct was not satisfactory. In view of above, the adoption of procedure laid down in Efficiency and Discipline Rules, 1975 was not to be complied with.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant we are not satisfied that her absence was justified and as well it was found that the authorities were not satisfied with her work, so the action taken against her was in order and fully justified.
6. The result is we do not find any merits in this appeal which is dismissed in limine.
However, there will be no order as to costs.
M .Y. M.
Appeal dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer