DISTRICT COORDINATION OFFICER NAROWAL and others vs ANSAR PERVAIZ
This matter originated as a petition for leave to appeal filed by government functionaries against a judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, which had partially allowed appeals filed by respondents, who were Dispensers in the Health Department. The respondents, initially appointed against leave vacancies, had served for approximately fifteen years before being directed to regularize their service, failing which they were removed. The Service Tribunal converted their removal from service into compulsory retirement. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the Tribunal was justified in modifying the penalty of removal to compulsory retirement given the respondents' long tenure. The Supreme Court dismissed the petitions, holding that the government functionaries could not benefit from their own prolonged inaction regarding the respondents' employment status. The Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing that after fourteen to fifteen years of service, the penalty of removal was inappropriate, and the modification to compulsory retirement was equitable. Furthermore, the Court determined that the petitions failed to raise any substantial question of law of public importance as required under the constitutional framework.
- Can government functionaries benefit from their own prolonged inaction in challenging the employment status of long-serving employees?
- Does a petition against a Service Tribunal judgment regarding service regularization and penalty modification involve a substantial question of law of public importance under Article 212(3)?
- Is a Service Tribunal justified in converting the penalty of removal from service to compulsory retirement for employees with long-standing service?
- Article 212(3), Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, J.--The petitioners, Government Functionaries, seek leave to appeal- from the judgment dated 27.10.2003, passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, in Appeals Nos, 841 & 842/2003.
2. The respondents were appointed as Dispensers in the Health Department, District Narowal. By order dated 30.1.2003, they were directed to get their service regularized within 90 days failing which they would be considered to be out of service w,e,f, 1.5.2003. Their representations were rejected by the departmental authorities on 24.4.2003 and 5.4.2003 respectively. Therefore, they moved the Tribunal by means of Appeals Nos, 841 & 842/2003, which were partly allowed by the impugned judgment dated 27.10.2003 whereby their penalty of removal from service was converted into compulsory retirement w,e,f, 10.5.2003.
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners argued that the respondents had been originally appointed against leave vacancies. However, they managed to continue in service for a period of fifteen years or so. Therefore, there was no justification for the Tribunal to have converted their removal from service into compulsory retirement from service.
4. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the Caveat submitted that the respondents had rendered satisfactory service for more than 15 years. Therefore, their removal from service was not justified.
5. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties at some length and have also perused the available record. Admittedly, the respondents had rendered about 14/15 year's service. The petitioners could not take benefit of their inaction at the relevant time. The Tribunal in the facts and the .circumstances of the case was quite justified in converting the penalty of removal of the respondents from service into compulsory retirement. In any case, these petitions do not involve any substantial question of law of public importance within the meaning of Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
6. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in these "I petitions which are dismissed and leave to appeal is refused accordingly.