PAKISTAN RAILWAYS Versus PRESIDING OFFICER, PUNJAB LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, LAHORE
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by the Pakistan Railways against the judgment of the High Court upholding the order of the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal, which had directed the Railways Administration to pay daily allowances to respondents Nos. 3 and 4, Special Ticket Examiners, for periods they served at Multan upon their own request due to lack of accommodation at their respective headquarters. The core legal question is whether Rule 205 of the Pakistan Railways Establishment Code, Volume 1, permits the payment of daily allowance when an employee's halt at a place exceeds 10 days, treating it as a temporary headquarter. The Supreme Court held that the contentions raised by the petitioner needed examination and granted leave to appeal, while suspending the orders of the High Court and the Labour Appellate Tribunal and directing that any amounts already paid should not be recovered during the pendency of the appeal. The key principle established relates to the interpretation of service rules concerning temporary headquarters and daily allowances for railway employees.
- Whether Rule 205 of the Pakistan Railways Establishment Code, Volume 1, permits the payment of daily allowance when the halt of an employee at any place exceeds 10 days?
- Does a place of halt exceeding 10 days become a temporary headquarter for the purpose of denying daily allowances under the Pakistan Railways Establishment Code?
- Rule 205, Pakistan Railways Establishment Code, Volume 1
ORDER
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J .‑‑Respondents Nos.3 and 4 are employees of the Pakistan Railways and were at the relevant time serving as Special Ticket Examiners. The headquarter of respondent .No. was Leigh while the headquarter of respondent No.4 was Dera Ghazi Khan. On account of lack of accommodation at their respective headquarters they were on their own request allowed to serve at Multan. The periods of their services at Multan were intermittent, being not less than 21 days or exceeding one year at any time. They claimed daily allowance for the periods they served at Multan. Their claim was rejected by the Railways Administration whereupon they approached reject Labour Court with grievance petitions. The Labour Court the Punjab rejected their petitions. They filed appeals before the Punjab Appellate Tribunal. The learned Tribunal allowed the appeals and directed the Railways Administration to pay daily allowance to them for the periods they had stayed at Multan. The Railways Administration invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court to call in question the legality of the order of the Tribunal but without any success. It now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. In support of this petition it is stated that respondents and 4 were permitted to serve at Multan on their own request in view of the lack of accommodation at their headquarters. Rule 205 of the Pakistan Railways Establishment Code, Volume 1, did not permit the payment of daily allowance when the halt of an employee at any place exceeded 10 days, for, in that event, the place of halt was to ,be regarded as his temporary headquarter. It is contended that the learned Tribunal and the High Court misconstrued the said Rule.
3. The contention raised on behalf of the Pakistan Railways needs examination. Leave to appeal is granted. The orders of the High Court and the learned Tribunal are suspended in the meanwhile. However, if any amount has been paid on account of daily allow and to respondents Nos.3 and 4, it should not be recovered during the pendency of the appeal. 'The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with a direction to the parties to file additional documents, if any, within two months.
M.I./P‑52/S Leave granted.