2023 P L C (C.S.

) Note 2

[Lahore High Court]

Before Jawad Hassan, J

EHSAN ELAHI

Versus

DISTRICT COLLECTOR and others

Writ Petition No.92292 of 2017, heard on 19th November, 2020.

Civil service---

----Contractual employment---Fake documents---Scope---Petitioner assailed cancellation/

withdrawal of his contract employment vide impugned order on the ground of production
of fake middle school certificate---Chief Executive Officer of the District Education
Authority had declared the petitioner's middle school certificate as fake---Terms and
conditions of the employment contract explicitly showed that the appointment would be
considered as void ab initio in case same obtained on the basis of forged/bogus
documents or through deceitful means---Employer had the prerogative to get verified any
documents/certificates of a person employed at any stage of service for satisfaction even
though it was not mentioned in the letter of appointment---Constitutional petition was
dismissed, in circumstances. [Paras. 7 & 12 of the judgment]

Shahzad Ghohar v. Government of Punjab and Aitchison College through its

Board of Governor 2018 PLC (C.S.) Note 1; Muhammad Mohsin Ismail v. Managing
Director Punjab Daanish Schools and 2 others 2018 PLC (C.S.) 722; Dr. Abid Ali v.
Chief Secretary, Government of Punjab and 3 others 2017 PLC (C.S.) 488 and Mubashar
Majeed v. Province of Punjab and 3 others 2017 PLC (C.S.) 940 rel.

Muhammad Shoaib for Petitioner.

Barrister Hassan Khalid Ranjha, Assistant Advocate General along with Zain-ul-
Abidin, Superintendent, D.C. Office, Sheikhupura for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 19th November, 2020.

JUDGMENT

JAWAD HASSAN, J.----Through the instant Constitutional petition filed under

Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (the
"Constitution"), the Petitioner has prayed for setting aside the order dated 29.08.2017
passed by the Respondent No.2/Commissioner Lahore Division Lahore whereby the
appeal filed by him against withdrawing/cancellation of his appointment order was
dismissed.

2. The facts tersely revealed from the petition are that the Petitioner was appointed as

1
Naib Qasid under disable quota vide contract of appointment dated 28.03.2017 with
certain terms and conditions mentioned therein. He started to perform his duties and all of
a sudden, his appointment was cancelled/withdrawn vide impugned order dated
27.07.2017 on the ground of production of fake middle school certificate. He filed appeal
before the Respondent No.2 against aforesaid order which too was dismissed. Hence this
petition.

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner inter alia contended that the impugned orders
are against the law and facts as the same have been passed without taking into
consideration the available record; that the impugned orders are the result of mis -reading
and non-reading of evidence; that no show-cause notice was issued to him before
cancellation of appointment letter; that the Petitioner produced his school leaving
certificate of seventh class therefore, allegation of bogus middle certificate is totally
unjustified; that the appointment letter cannot be withdrawn or cancelled once it is
implemented and as such the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

4. Learned Law Officer vehemently contested the arguments advanced by the learned
counsel for the Petitioner and contended that the impugned orders have been passed
strictly in accordance with law and in line with the verdict of the apex Court. He further
stated that the Petitioner was not entitled to appointment as he produced fake middle
school certificate in order to procure his appointment.

5. Report and parawise comments were submitted by the Respondent wherein they
stated that the Petitioner attached his middle pass certified issued by the Noble Model
School Bhikhi Road, Sheikhupura with his application in order to maintain the merit
against other candidates. It was further stated that the Petitioner's contract was rightly
cancelled in terms of Clause-j of the appointment letter which was accepted by him at the
time of appointment.

6. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and have gone
through the record.

7. The fact of appointment of the Petitioner as Naib Qasid is not disputed by all
hands. His appointment was purely temporary. He, after accepting the terms and
conditions of his contract employment submitted his joining report. Specific term in the
employment contract, containing certain terms and conditions, were inserted which re ads
as follows:
"j. That if at any stage, it is discovered that you obtained this appointment on the
basis of forged/bogus documents or through deceitful means, your appointment
shall be considered to be void ab initio and you shall be liable to be refund all
amounts received from the Government as a consequence of this appointment
along with registration of F.I.R. and criminal proceedings in addition to such other
action as may be taken against you under the law"

The above Clause explicitly shows that the appointment shall be considered as
void ab initio in case it was discovered that it was obtained on the basis of forged/bogus
documents or through deceitful means. Record reveals that the Petitioner was appointed
by the Respondents vide appointment letter dated 28.03.2017. He produced middle school
certificate and started his job. The said certificate was sent to Chief Executive Officer,

2
District Education Authority, Sheikhupura for verification on 02.02.2017. Upon
verification, the Chief Executive Officer declared his middle school certificate as fake
vide letter dated 10.06.2017 and pursuant to aforesaid verification, his appointment letter
was cancelled/withdrawn from the date of issuance. The ground agitated by the counsel
for the Petitioner is that the Petitioner never produced this certificate as he appeared in
Matriculation Exam through Illama Iqbal Open University and along with his application
produced the result intimation card and school leaving certificate of seventh class. The
said ground is not believable because the issue in hand is with regard to production of
middle certificate and not school leaving certificate or a matriculation result card (in
which the Petitioner could not pass certain subjects and is incomplete). The Petitioner has
attached with this petition school leaving certificate of seventh class issued by
Government High School, Ferozwattuwan, District Sheikhupura while the Respondents
got verified his middle certificate issued by Noble Model School Bhikhi Road,
Sheikhupura which was produced at the time of appointment and later on was declared as
bogus. Even otherwise, the employer has the prerogative to get verified any
documents/certificates of a person employed at any stage of service for satisfaction even
though it was not mentioned in the letter of appointment.

8. From the above facts and circumstances, I am of the considered view the
Petitioner, at the time of joining, has accepted all the terms and conditions of his contract
employment, cannot resile from the same at belated stage and also it is established from
the record that he produced fake middle certificate. I see no illegality or perversity in the
impugned orders which have been passed in accordance with law and therefore, cannot be
interfered with. I have fortified my view seeking guidance from the judgment passed by
the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in case titled "Shahzad Ghohar v. Government
of Punjab and Aitchison College through its Board of Governor" (2018 PLC (C.S.) Note -
1) in which it has been held as under:
"It was also made specifically clear that the Employment Contract does not confer
on the Appellant any claim/right to permanent employment in the College. In the
above situation, the Appellant has himself admitted all the terms and conditions of
his Employment Contract, he cannot claim his regularization from this Court
rather has rightly been considered to be out of service on the expiry of his contract
employment as settled by the parties under the terms of the Employment Contract"

9. This Court in case titled "Muhammad Mohsin Ismail v. Managing Director Punjab
Daanish Schools and 2 others" (2018 PLC (C.S.) 722) has also held as under:
"The Respondents have invoked clause-4(b), terminated the services of the
Petitioner with immediate effect entitling the Petitioner to receive one month's pay
in lieu of the quit service as per terms and conditions, therefore, assertions of the
learned counsel for the Petitioner that no notice has been served upon the
Petitioner, cannot sustain. The law on this point has been settled by the apex Court
of the country in the cases of "Government of Balochistan, Department of Health
through Secretary, Civil Secretariat, Quetta v. Dr. Zahida Kakar and 43 others"
(2005 SCMR 642) and "Major (R) Nisar Ali v. Pakistan Atomic Energy
Commission and another" (2004 PLC (C.S.) 758).

10. The Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in case titled "Dr. Abid Ali v. Chief
Secretary, Government of Punjab and 3 others" (2017 PLC (C.S.) 488) has held as under:

3
 "the employee, after accepting terms and conditions of his contract employment
had submitted his joining report. Service of such employee could be terminated
without assigning any reason. Employee had no right to claim extension in his
contract period as a vested right. Behaviour of employee remained unsatisfactory
towards his superior which resulted into his termination."

11. In case titled "Mubashar Majeed v. Province of Punjab and 3 others" (2017 PLC
(C.S.) 940) the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court has also held that
"employee could not claim extension of the contract as a matter of right rather it
was the prerogative of the competent authority either to dispense with services of
such employee or continue with the same by tending the contract."

12. In view of above discussion, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned
orders which otherwise have been passed aptly. Resultantly, the instant petition stands
dismissed.

SA/E-2/L Petition dismissed.