Dr. AZEEMUR REHMAN and others vs GOVERNMENT OF SINDH
This matter concerns a series of civil appeals filed against a consolidated judgment of the Sindh Service Tribunal, which had dismissed the appellants' challenges to a seniority list issued on 19-8-1999. During the proceedings, the Advocate General for Sindh acknowledged that the initial seniority list of 24-3-1998 required modification due to retirements and deaths, leading to the issuance of the 19-8-1999 list. Crucially, it was conceded that the departmental appeals filed by the appellants against this latter list remained undecided. Given this procedural vacuum, the Advocate General consented to the partial allowance of the appeals and the setting aside of the impugned judgment. The Supreme Court, noting the lack of opposition from the respondents, partly allowed the appeals. The Court set aside the findings of the Tribunal regarding the appellants and directed the Competent Authority to adjudicate the pending departmental appeals within six weeks after providing a hearing to all concerned parties. This decision reinforces the principle that administrative remedies must be exhausted and decided upon by the competent authority before judicial intervention is finalized.
- Can a service tribunal dismiss an appeal against a seniority list when the underlying departmental appeals remain undecided?
- Is the government entitled to modify a seniority list to account for retirements and deaths of employees?
- Does the Supreme Court have the authority to direct a Competent Authority to decide pending departmental appeals within a fixed timeframe?
ORDER
' TASSADUQ HUSSAIN JILLANI, J.---This order shall dispose of Civil Appeal Nos. 1233 to 1251 of 2005 directed against the consolidated judgment dated 7-4-2005 passed by the Sindh Service Tribunal vide which the appeals of the appellants against seniority list dated 19-8-1999 were dismissed.
2. Learned Advocate General Sindh submits on Court query that the original seniority list dated 24- 3-1998 was superseded by the list issued on 19-8-1999 because certain persons had died and some of them had retired and the list needed modification/rectification. Adds that the appeals filed by the appellants against the seniority list dated 19-8-1999 before the Departmental Authority were not decided and it would be in the interest of justice if those appeals are decided in the first instance as those according to his instructions are still pending. In these circumstances lie submitted that Provincial Government would have no objection if the instant appeals are partly allowed and the impugned judgment to their extent is set aside.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents does not join issue with learned Advocate General on the stand taken by him.
4. In the afore referred circumstances, the appeals are partly allowed, the impugned judgments with regard to the findings qua the appellants are set aside and the Competent Authority in the Department is directed to decide the pending appeals within six weeks of the receipt of this order after hearing all concerned.