Abdul Rehman

(1)

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN. C.M. No. /2000 In W.P No. 2220/Misc/1998 ________ . In re:

Abdul Rehman Vs. M.D.A. M.D.A. through its Director General.

\u2026\u2026\u2026.PETITIONER/RESPONDENT

VERSUS

Abdul Rehman S/o Ghulam Muhammad, caste Khawaja Saddiqui, R/o H. No. 1269, Street Kamangran Wali, Mohallah Qaleen Bafan, Multan.

\u2026\u2026..RESPONDEN/PETITIONER

APPLICA ION UNDER SECTION 151T OF C.PC. FOR RECALLING OF STAY. ORDER IN ABOVE-TITLED CASE.

Respectfully Sheweth:

-1. That above-titled writ petition is pending before this Hon\u2019ble Court.

2. That brief facts leading to the instant application are that

respondent/ petitioner was employed by Director Engineering M.D.A. on contract basis as Imam Masjid vide order dated 8.5.1995. The period of employment as per contract was 14 months, till 7.7.1996. On expiry of contract of employment, it was extended for another year with eﬀect from 8.7.1996 to 7.7.1997. Respondent/petitioner vide application dated

(2)

26.6.1997 applied for extension period of contract of

employment but same was rejected by the competent authority and respondent/petitioner was informed about expiry of his contract of employment and rejection of application, as such he was relieved from contract service with eﬀect from 8.7.1997.

3. That respondent/petitioner challenged the termination of

contract employment before this Hon\u2019ble Court through above titled writ petitioner, wherein this Hon\u2019ble Court directed the respondent to allow the petitioner to work against his post.

4. That contract of employment of petitioner expired on 7.7.1997 and same was not extended as his services were no more longer required. However, in compliance of order of this Hon\u2019ble Court, respondent/ petitioner Abdul Rehman was taken on duty and from July 1997 to September 2000, M.D.A. paid to him

about Rs. 135,000/- in the head of salary which is just liability on M.D.A. as due to short of funds for salaries, etc. M.D.A. can not pay in time salaries to its regular employees. Petitioner

succeeded in obtaining stay from this Hon\u2019ble Court and is enjoying the same from the last three years, despite, his contract of employment expired.

5. That M.D.A. is facing ﬁnancial crises and in such circumstances M.D.A. is being unnecessarily burdened by paying salary to

such person whose contract of employment expired and his services are no more required. Therefore, it is very much

appropriate in the present case, that stay order granted by this Hon\u2019ble Court may be recalled as M.D.A. cannot aﬀord extra employment of petitioner.

6. That there is no possibility of early re-listing of W.P No.. 2220/Misc./98, therefore, an application is being moved for recalling of stay order as M.D.A. is suﬀering great ﬁnancial loss due the pendency of above-titled case. It is well-settled principle of law that contract employees have no vested right to challenge_{Contd. to page 3}

(3)

-2-the termination of contract of employment, even on this score, writ petition is not maintainable.

7. That M.D.A. is statutory body but so far Govt. of Punjab has not framed rules for its employees as provided in S. 43 of Punjab Development of Cities Act, 1976, as such principles of Master and Servant is applicable to

petitioner/respondent\u2019s establishment. Besides this, respondent/petitioner was appointed on

contract basis, on expiry of contract period he had been left with no vested right to serve and cannot challenge the termination of service on expiry of contract period. Aﬀidavit attached.

8. That respondent/petitioner\u2019s case is lacking of three necessary ingredients for grant of

temporary injunction, therefore, stay order dated 22.7.1997 my be recalled.

In view of the above, it is respectfully prayed that present application may very kindly be accepted

and stay order issued by this Hon\u2019ble Court in above titled writ petition may very kindly be recalled in the

interest of justice.

Humble Petitioner/respondent,

Dated: ___________

For Multan Development Authority.

Through:

-Muhammad Amin Malik Advocate High Court, 38-Muhammadan Block District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20038

(4)

-3-IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN. C.M. No. /2000 In W.P No. 2220/Misc/1998 _________ . In re:

Abdul Rehman Vs. M.D.A. M.D.A. through its Director General.

……….PETITIONER/RESPONDENT

VERSUS

Abdul Rehman S/o Ghulam Muhammad, caste Khawaja Saddiqui, R/o H. No. 1269, Street Kamangran Wali, Mohallah Qaleen Bafan, Multan.

……..RESPONDEN/PETITIONER APPLICA ION UNDER SECTION 151T

OF C.PC. FOR RECALLING OF STAY. ORDER IN ABOVE-TITLED CASE.

AFFIDA IT of: -V

Muhammad Tayyab, Director Engineering, M.D.A. Multan.

I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly aﬀirm and declare that the contents of the above application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing has been kept concealed thereto.

DEPONENT Veriﬁcation:

-Veriﬁed on oath at Multan, this _____ day of December 2000 that the contents of this

(5)

aﬀidavit are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

DEPONENT IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,

MULTAN. C.M. No. /2000 In W.P No. 5556/Misc/1997 __________ . In re:

Muneer Ahmad etc. Vs. M.D.A.

M.D.A. through its Director General.

VERSUS

Muneer Ahmad S/o Sultan Muhammad Khan, Security Guard, Resident of Al-Khair Colony, Nawabpur Road, Multan and 11 others.

……..RESPONDEN/PETITIONER

AFFIDA IT of: -V

Muhammad Tayyab, Director Engineering, M.D.A. Multan.

I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly aﬀirm and declare that the contents of the above application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing has been kept concealed thereto.

DEPONENT Veriﬁcation:

-Veriﬁed on oath at Multan, this _____ day of December 2000 that the contents of this

(6)

aﬀidavit are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

DEPONENT IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,

MULTAN. C.M. No. /2000 In W.P No. 5556/Misc/1997 __________ . In re:

Muneer Ahmad etc. Vs. M.D.A.

M.D.A. through its Director General.

VERSUS

Muneer Ahmad S/o Sultan Muhammad Khan, Security Guard, Resident of Al-Khair Colony, Nawabpur Road, Multan and 11 others.

……..RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS

Respectfully Sheweth:

-1. That above-titled writ petition is pending before this Hon’ble Court.

2. That brief facts leading to the instant application are that

respondents/petitioners were employed by Director Engineering M.D.A. on contract basis against diﬀerent jobs in Shah Shamas Park, Multan. Initially, the duration of contract was 14 months, w.e.f. 8.5.95. On expiry of contract of employment, it was

(7)

extended for another year with eﬀect from 8.7.1996 to 7.7.1997 vide order dated 22.7.1997. The respondents/petitioners moved an application dated 26.6.1997 for extension of contract of

employment but same was rejected by the competent authority as such respondents/ petitioners’ contract of employment expired with eﬀect from 8.7.1997.

3. That on 21.7.1997, respondents/petitioners ﬁled a writ petition No. 5556/1997 before this Hon’ble Court and alleged that

petitioner/respondent illegally stopped them from the performance of their duties and sought declaration from this Hon’ble Court that the act/action/order through which the

petitioners have been deprived from their services may kindly be declared illegal, unlawful and without jurisdiction. On

22.7.1997, the aforesaid writ petition was ﬁxed for preliminary arguments before this Hon’ble Court. After hearing the learned counsel for petitioner, this Hon’ble Court directed respondent to “submit his report and parawsie comments to this petition so as to reach this court on a date in the second week of September, 1997. Till then, they are allowed to work against their respective posts”.

4. That contract of employment of petitioners expired on 7.7.1997 and same was not extended as their services were no longer required. However, in compliance of order dated 22.7.1997 passed by this Hon’ble Court, respondents/ petitioners were taken on duty and from July 1997 to September 2000, M.D.A. paid to them about Rs. 11,00,000/- in the head of salary. M.D.A. has to pay heavy amount to the respondents/petitioners each month. Besides this, due to stay granted by this Hon’ble Court, petitioner/respondent cannot stop the respondents/ petitioners from the performance of their duty. Further due to stay order of this Hon’ble Court, respondent/petitioner do not perform their duties properly and misbehave with public.

5. That M.D.A. is facing ﬁnancial crises and in such circumstances when M.D.A. has no money to pay salaries to its regular staﬀ, department is being unnecessarily burdened by paying salary to

Contd. to page 3

(8)

-2-such persons whose contract of employment expired and their services are no more required. Therefore, it is very much appropriate in the present case that stay granted to the respondents/petitioners may very kindly be recalled as M.D.A. cannot aﬀord extra employment.

6. That there is no possibility of early re-listing of W.P No.. 5556/Misc./97, therefore, an application is being moved for recalling of stay order, as M.D.A. is suﬀering great ﬁnancial loss due the pendency of above-titled case. Besides this, it is well-settled principle of law that contract employees have no vested right to challenge the termination of contract of employment. 7. That M.D.A. is statutory body but so far Govt. of Punjab has not

framed rules for its employees as provided in S. 43 of Punjab Development of Cities Act, 1976, as such principles of Master and Servant is applicable to petitioner’s/ respondent’s establishment. Besides this, respondents/ petitioners were appointed on contract basis, on expiry of contract period they had been left with no vested right to serve and cannot challenge the termination of service on expiry of contract period. Aﬀidavit attached.

8. That respondent/petitioner’s case is lacking three necessary ingredients for grant of temporary injunction, therefore, stay order dated 22.7.1997 my be recalled.

In view of the above, it is respectfully prayed that present application may very kindly be accepted and stay order dated 22.7.1997 granted in above titled writ petition may very kindly be recalled in the interest of justice.

Humble Petitioner/respondent, Dated: ___________

For Multan Development Authority.

Through:

-Muhammad Amin Malik Advocate High Court, 38-Muhammadan Block District Courts, Multan.

(9)