1984 PLC(CS) 1311

The appeal captioned above is directed against the decision, dated 14th November, 1983 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 2, Lahore, whereby the respondent was directed to be reinsta ted in service. Back benefits have not been allowed for the reason that by means of an ex pane decision, the respondent had been directed to be reinstated. The respondent has claimed back benefits by filing cross objections which are being disposed of alongwith the appeal.

2. Admittedly, the respondent is an employee of Punjab Government and is on deputation with Wapda. The learned lower Court has accepted the grievance petition for the reason that the respondent being an employee of the Punjab Government could not be terminated under section 17 (1‑A), Wapda Act. The section referred to above does not say that only those persons can be removed from service who are employed by Wapda. Rather it says that any person employed or serving under Wapda can be terminated. Explanation given under the section says that if any deputationist with Wapda has been terminated under section 17 (1‑A) of Wapda; Act, he would stand repatriated to the Government from where he had come So the respondent instead of bringing petition under section 25‑A) should have reported to the Government with a copy of the order of his, removal from service. An order of termination passed by the Authority under section 17 (1‑A) cannot be challenged before any forum, including the Labour Courts by virtue of section 17 (1‑C) of the WAPDA Act.

3. As a result, the appeal is accepted and setting aside the impugned ex-parte decision of the learned lower Court, the grievance petition is dismissed.

A. B. Appeal accepted.