Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199

Summary

The petitioner, a contractual Entomologist (BS-17) in the Department of Plant Protection, challenged her termination dated 16.10.2023, claiming it was illegal, malafide, discriminatory, and stigmatic. She alleged the termination was in retaliation for taking action against blacklisted exporters and argued that she was denied due process, including a show-cause notice or formal inquiry. She also sought payment of outstanding salaries from March–May and July 2023 onwards.

The respondents argued that the termination was a “termination simpliciter” of a temporary contract due to downsizing after the locust emergency, not punitive, and that contract employees cannot claim reinstatement under constitutional jurisdiction but may only seek damages.

The Court distinguished simple termination (allowed under contract) from stigmatic/punitive termination (requires due process). Since the petitioner’s termination involved potential stigma—linked to her enforcement actions against blacklisted companies—the Court held that due process must be afforded. The termination order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the competent authority for a fresh decision within two months, allowing the petitioner a full opportunity to be heard.