Probationary Employees do not have a Vested Right to Continued Employment and can be dismissed without Notice unless explicitly protected by Law --- Islamabad High Court, Islamabad

Islamabad 26-03-2025: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has dismissed a petition filed by Professor Doctor, challenging his termination from Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Medical University (SZABMU), Islamabad. The Court ruled that the termination was lawful and in accordance with the terms of his appointment.

The judgment, authored by Mr. Justice Muhammad Asif, reaffirmed the university’s authority to terminate an employee during the probationary period without assigning any reason or issuing a notice. The case, [W.P No. 446 of 2019], was decided after hearings on February 13 and 28, 2025.

The Professor Doctor was appointed as a Professor of Biochemistry at SZABMU on December 22, 2017, under BPS-21. His appointment letter stipulated a one-year probationary period, during which his performance and conduct would be evaluated. On December 27, 2018, the university issued a notification terminating his services with retrospective effect from December 20, 2018, citing unsatisfactory performance and concerns over the authenticity of his qualifications.

The Professor Doctor, through his counsel, contended that the termination was in violation of his appointment terms and constitutional rights. He argued that:

1. The termination order was issued with retrospective effect, which is legally impermissible.
2. He was not afforded a personal hearing or due process before termination.
3. The decision was driven by mala fide intent, as he had applied for Vice-Chancellor positions at other institutions, but the university refused to issue him a No Objection Certificate (NOC).

The university, represented by its counsel, argued that:

1. The termination was duly approved by the Syndicate in its 12th meeting on December 20, 2018.
2. The Professor Doctor had failed to provide verified copies of his academic credentials despite multiple requests.
3. He had allegedly removed his personal file from the university records, which led to a fact-finding inquiry and a show-cause notice.
4. His performance as a professor was unsatisfactory, as he frequently missed classes and engaged in disruptive institutional politics.

Mr. Justice Muhammad Asif, after reviewing the evidence and arguments, upheld the university’s decision, stating that:

1. The petitioner was on probation, and his termination complied with the terms of his appointment letter, which allowed termination without notice or cause.
2. The issuance of a show-cause notice regarding the missing personal file was sufficient to address procedural concerns.
3. The university acted within its legal authority, and there was no violation of natural justice or constitutional rights.
4. The petitioner failed to establish mala fide intent on the part of the university.

The Court ruled that the termination was lawful and dismissed the petition as meritless. The judgment reinforces the legal principle that probationary employees do not have a vested right to continued employment and can be dismissed without notice unless explicitly protected by law.

Powered by Froala Editor