Law: Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972

Section: 3(2)

(a) Employment Daily-wage teacher---Appointment extended from time to time---Regularization approved by cabinet sub-committee---Subsequent termination of service---Whether subsequent termination could defeat accrued right of regularization?---Briefly, respondent No.1 was appointed as a daily-wage teacher for 89 days and her appointment was extended from time to time; her case was later approved for regularization by the Cabinet Sub-Committee but her services were terminated; after repeated rounds of litigation and remand orders, the Single Judge in Chambers allowed her writ petition and directed the department to decide her case in light of the approval---Held: Admittedly the respondent No.1 was included in the list of employees whose services were approved for regularization by the cabinet sub-committee---The said decision had neither been rescinded nor modified and, admittedly, had been acted upon in respect of other similarly placed employees---Denial of the same relief to respondent No.1 without any lawful justification clearly amounted to hostile discrimination, offending Arts. 4 and 25 of the Constitution---There was no merit in the present appeal and same was dismissed, in circumstances. (b) Employment Termination from service---Employee being over-aged at the time of her appointment, plea of---Legality---Once an appointing authority consciously appoints a candidate after relaxing or overlooking an age condition, it cannot be permitted to turn around at a belated stage and raise such an objection to the detriment of the employee.        Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secretary Administration Department and others 2021 SCMR 630 rel. (c) Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972) S.3(2)---Intra-court appeal---Interference in judgment passed by Single Judge in Chambers---Scope---Discretionary relief granted by Single Judge in Chambers, particularly where it is based on consistent judicial directions, constitutional guarantees and undisputed record, should not be lightly interfered with in intra-court appeal unless the judgmentisshowntobearbitrary,capricious or contrary to law. (d) Employment Employer developing sense of…