lqbal Hussain vs The General Manager, Southern Telecom Region-II and others
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against an order of the Federal Service Tribunal regarding the service status of the petitioner, who was initially appointed to the Pakistan Telegraph & Telephone Department in 1963. The core legal question is whether an employee originally appointed under statutory rules in a government department remains governed by those statutory rules for the purpose of seeking legal remedies following the department's privatization and conversion into a corporate entity. The petitioner contends that despite the privatization, his employment status remains protected by the original statutory rules, challenging the contrary conclusion reached by the Federal Service Tribunal. The Supreme Court, finding that the contentions raised require detailed consideration, granted leave to appeal. The Court directed the petitioner to submit all documentation pertaining to his appointment and continuous service record since 1963 to substantiate his claim. The matter has been scheduled for further hearing within six months, thereby keeping the legal question regarding the applicability of statutory rules post-privatization open for final adjudication.
- Does an employee originally appointed under statutory rules in a government department continue to be governed by those rules after the department's privatization?
- Can a former government employee seek remedies based on original statutory rules after the department is converted into a company?
ORDER
1. ANWAR ZAHEER JAMALI, J. --- Learned ASC for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that petitioner was appointed in Pakistan Telegraph & Telephone Department on 17.1.1963 which had statutory rules. In such circumstances even after its privatization and conversion into company for the purpose of remedy he was governed by statutory rules as against the conclusion recorded in the impugned order by Federal Service Tribunal. In support of his submissions he has placed reliance upon the recent consolidated judgment of this Court in C.P. No. 565/2014, C.P.No. 2067/2014 and other petitions dated 12.6.2015. Contentions raised need consideration. Leave to appeal is accordingly granted. The petitioner is, however, directed to place all the documents regarding his appointment and continuation of service since 1963. Office to relist the appeals arising out of this petition for hearing within six months.