GUL MUHAMMAD vs M.C.B. BANK LIMITED through President and others
This matter concerns a service dispute involving the dismissal of a bank officer, Gul Muhammad, who was terminated for allegedly crediting a customer's deposit into his personal account. The Labor Court converted the dismissal into compulsory retirement, a decision subsequently challenged by both the employee and the employer before the Islamabad High Court, which upheld the Labor Court's order. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to both parties. A primary legal question arose regarding the limitation period for the Bank's appeal, which was filed 21 days late. The Bank sought condonation of delay, arguing it only received the judgment copy 15 days after its announcement. The Supreme Court held that the limitation period commences from the date of the judgment's announcement in open court, not from the receipt of the copy. As the Bank failed to demonstrate ignorance of the pronouncement, the application for condonation was dismissed, and the Bank's appeal was rejected as time-barred. Consequently, the employee's appeal was not pressed and was also dismissed.
- Does the limitation period for filing an appeal run from the date of the judgment's announcement in open court or from the date of receipt of the judgment copy?
- Is a party's lack of knowledge regarding the announcement of a judgment a valid ground for condonation of delay if the party was represented in court?
- Can an appeal be dismissed solely on the grounds of being time-barred when the application for condonation of delay is found to be untenable?
' NASIR-UL-MULK, J.---The appellant in Civil Appeal No, 196 of 2009, Gull Muhammad, former Grade- III officer in the Muslim Commercial Bank, Regional Office, Islamabad, was dismissed from service on the allegation that he had credited in his own account Rs,5,400 deposited by a customer of the Bank. He filed a grievance petition before the Labor Court. After recording the evidence, the Court found that the dismissal of the appellant was not warranted, as the deposit of the account in question in his personal account may have been on account of some error. The Court, however, converted the order of dismissal into compulsorily retirement from service. This order was challenged before the Islamabad High Court in appeals by the appellant as well as the Bank.
Rejecting the argument on behalf of the Bank that the appellant was not a 'workman', the Court upheld the order of the Labor Court. Leave to appeal was granted to Ghulam Muhammad as well as the Bank.
2. Leave was granted to the Bank subject to determination of the question of limitation that was to be decided at the time of the hearing of the appeal. The petition filed by the Bank was barred by 21 days. In the application for condo nation of delay, the Bank has stated that though the judgment of the High Court was announced on 1-12-2008, the same was transmitted to the Bank on 16-12-2008.
Such explanation for condo nation of delay is untenable in law. The judgment was announced on 1- 12-2008 in open Court. It is not the case of the Bank that either they were not represented at the time of the announcement of the judgment or were unaware of the same, until they received a copy of the judgment on 16-12-2008. The time of limitation to impugn a judgment runs from the date the same is announced. In case of delay the parties have to expressly state and show that they were unaware of the pronouncement of the judgment. The application for coadunation of delay is, therefore, dismissed. Consequently, Appeal No, 197 of 2009 filed by the Bank is dismissed as barred by time.
3. In view of dismissal of the above said appeal, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant in Civil Appeal No, 196 of 2009 did not press the appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed.
Cited by 3 cases
- IYAZ-UL-HAQ CHAUDHRY vs NIB BANK LIMITED through Authorized Attorney 2016 CLD 1741, 2016 PLJ Lahore 71
- CHIEF EXECUTIVE MEPCO, MULTAN and 2 others vs ALI SHER 2013 PLC 254
- IYAZULHAQ CHAUDHRY vs NIB BANK LTD. through Authorized Attorney and 4 2016 PLJ Lahore 71