PESHAWAR: A Peshawar High Court bench on Wednesday stopped the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government and Pakistan Air Force from taking any adverse action against some employees of a government technical training centre, who have challenged the handing over of the management of 11 training centres to the PAF.

Chief Justice Yahya Afridi and Justice Ikramullah Khan directed the industries department and PAF to maintain status quo on the matter.

The bench fixed March 29 for the next hearing into the petition and issued notices to the respondents including provincial government through industries secretary and federal government through the defence ministry asking them to explain their positions on the matter.

The petition is jointly filed by Syed Yousaf Ali Shah and four other employees of Technical Training and Vocation CentreGulbahar,Peshawar, who have requested the court to declare that the acts of the provincial government in entering into joint ventures with public sector bodies as illegal and in conflict with the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Technical Education and Vocational Training Authority (Tevta) Act 2015, for violating the provisions of the said Act, as well violating the rights of the petitioners.

The petitioners prayed the court to declare the abolition of certain poststhrough a notification on May 10, 2016, illegal and without lawful authority.

They also sought orders for the protection of their rights by accommodating them in the centres.

The petitioners said as interim relief to them, the respondents could be stopped from transferring them to other centres from their current ones besides other no adverse action.

Respondents in the petition are the federation of Pakistan through the defence secretary; Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government through industries secretary; chairman of the KP-Tevta; KP-Tevta board of directors through its secretary; director (admin and HR) KP-Tevta; director (operation) Tevta; and director (training Non-Tech) and PAF Headquarters.

Qazi Mohammad Anwar, lawyer for the petitioners, said in 2002, the Directorate of Technical Education and Directorate of Manpower training were merged as Directorate of Technical Education and Manpower training. He added that the provincial government promulgated the KP Technical Education and Vocational Training Agency Ordinance, 2002, which regulated in entirety the services of the Petitioners and supplemental procee dings.

The lawyer said the ordinance was later replaced with the KP-Tevta Act 2015 primarily stressing on public-private partnership.

He said despite the law stating otherwise, the KP-Tevta made a joint venture agreement with the PAF, which was a public body.

`By virtue of the said agreement,initially, five vocational training institutes had to be handed over to PAF.

Later, the KP-Tevta entered into a revised agreement with the PAF under which the relevant institutions were to be transformed to Shaheen vocational training institutes.

The agreement provided the handing over of the entire control and management of the five centres to PAF, which were notified through a notification on Aug 4, 2015,` he said.

The lawyer said the handing over of the control and management meant that the said centers would have employees taken from PAF and not the public servants of KP-Tevta.

He claimed that Tevta issued funds amounting to Rs112.75 million and Rs1.5 billion in favour of PAF, without any legal justification or following the lawful procedure. He added that there was no mention as to how this amount should be utilised and for what purpose.

The lawyer said the respondents later advertised certain vacancies against posts for initial appointments, which by going through the KP-Tevta Rules had to be filled through promotion of the already employed public servants of KP-Tevta.

He added that of the 38 centres, 11 had been handed over to PAF and looking at pace with which the centres were being distributed, KP-Tevta should cease to exist as a body, as the funds were of KP-Tevta, whereas the employees were of PAF, which was against the very spirit of the law, and was an attempt to deprive the petitioners of their valuable rights.