MUHAMMAD SHABBIR UR RAHMAN vs CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER; G. H. Q.
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, which dismissed the petitioner's appeal concerning the seniority assigned to a respondent. The core legal question was whether a person who remains junior to the respondent both before and after the impugned seniority assignment qualifies as an 'aggrieved person' under section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973, so as to maintain an appeal. The Supreme Court held that since the petitioner was not affected by the seniority assignment and those actually affected had not challenged it or been impleaded, the petitioner was not an aggrieved person. The petition was accordingly dismissed. The key principle laid down is that a government servant who suffers no adverse impact on their relative seniority position and remains junior cannot maintain an appeal before the service tribunal as an aggrieved person.
- Is a government servant who remains junior before and after a seniority assignment an aggrieved person under the Service Tribunals Act, 1973?
- Does an employee have the locus standi to challenge a seniority list when they are not personally affected by the assignment?
- Section 4, Service Tribunals Act 1973
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J--Leave to appeal has been sought from judgment dated 25-10-1981 of the Federal Service Tribunal ; whereby petitioner's appeal regarding seniority assigned to Abdul Qayyum respondent, was dismissed.
2. One reason for the dismissal of petitioner's appeal was that he being junior to Abdul Qayyum respondent before and after the impugned seniority assignment, was not an aggrieved person so as to invoke the appellate jurisdic--tion of the Central Tribunal under section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973.
3. We questioned the petitioner whether he would be affected by the impugned seniority assignment and whether those who in fact are affected, challenged the same or have been impleaded as parties but he answered in the negative. That being so, we agree with the Tribunal that the petitioner ill the circumstances of this case, 'is not an aggrieved person, therefore, his appeal was rightly dismissed. This petition fails and accordingly is dismissed.
Cited by 3 cases
- ABDUL SAMAD KHAN vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (SECTT) ICT, ISLAMABAD 2013 KLR Civil Cases 331, 2013 PLJ Islamabad 70, 2013 PLD Islamabad 71
- EHSAN Ali and 2 others vs SECRETARY, KANA DIVISION, ISLAMABAD and 3 others 1996 PLC (C.S.) 999
- Abdul Samad Khan vs Assistant Commissioner (SECTT) ICT, Islamabad 2013 KLR Civil Cases 331