GHULAM ABBAS Versus SECRETARY/CHAIRMAN, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD
These appeals by leave of the Court arise from a common judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal dismissing the appellants' service appeals on the ground that, not being permanent workmen, they could not invoke the Tribunal's jurisdiction, and because they failed to produce formal appointment and termination orders after serving Pakistan Railways for over a decade. The core legal question concerns the competency of the service appeals and the employment status of workers subjected to artificial breaks in service. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that the Tribunal erred in dismissing the appeals in limine without addressing the substantive evidence. The impugned judgment was set aside, and the matters were remanded to the Federal Service Tribunal for a fresh decision on merits after considering relevant evidence. The key principle laid down is that temporary employment maneuvers involving artificial breaks to deny permanent status must be examined through comprehensive evaluation of service records and evidence rather than summary dismissal.
- Can temporary workers who experience artificial breaks in employment invoke the jurisdiction of the Federal Service Tribunal?
- Whether the Federal Service Tribunal can dismiss service appeals solely due to the non-production of written appointment and termination orders when long-term employment is evidenced by service records?
- Do benefits such as medical treatment, free travelling passes, increments, and G.P. Fund deductions indicate the status of regular employees?
- Section 25-A, Industrial Relations Ordinance
RANA BHAGWANDAS, J. ‑‑‑These appeals by leave of the Court arise out of a common judgment dated 27‑4‑1998 rendered by the Federal Service Tribunal dismissing service appeals of the appellants for the reason that as they were not permanent workmen they could not invoke the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. The Tribunal was also swayed away that they did not file their orders of appointments and written orders terminating their employment after having served in Pakistan Railways for over a decade.
2. The appellants though worked for Pakistan Railways for various periods ranging up to ten years or more on paper but they were treated as temporary workers and their services were terminated after a lapse of two months or so every time in order to create a break in their employment so that they should not acquire the status of a permanent workman. It is not disputed that they were appointed some times in 1986, 1987 whereas their services were orally terminated in September, 1997 obliging them to prefer separate grievance petitions under section 25‑A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance before the Sindh Labour Court, Sukkur. Respondents's case before the Labour Court was that the appellants were not workers/workmen within the meaning of the term. Their grievance petitions were, however, dismissed. Later, the appellants invoked the jurisdiction of the Federal Service Tribunal by filing service appeals which were resisted and ultimately dismissed as incompetent by the impugned judgment.
3. In support of their cases appellants have placed on record a number of documents tending to show that they had been treated as regular employees of the Pakistan Railways inasmuch as they were provided with medical treatment, free travelling passes, increments in salaries, medical reimbursement including hospitalization, deduction of G.P. Fund and also maintenance of their Service Books.
4. On the last date of hearing when these appeals came up for hearing before this Court, learned counsel for the respondents expressed the view that the respondents were authorized to appoint and terminate the workers in Pakistan Railways verbally. He was, therefore, called upon to make such submission in writing. Accordingly, learned counsel has placed a note spread over five pages attempting to justify his stand with reference to Pakistan Government Railways Code for. Engineering Department. On factual plane learned counsel says that the documents relied upon by the appellants are not authentic and have been rather forged.
5. In order to resolve the controversy, these appeals are accepted, impugned judgment rendered by the Federal Service Tribunal is set aside and the appeals are remanded to the Federal Service Tribunal for a fresh decision on merits after taking into consideration relevant evidence that may be adduced by the parties. Since the question of reinstatement of the appellants has been pending since long, hopefully the Tribunal shall take steps for deciding this matter on priority basis and dispose of the same within four months. In case it be not possible, the Tribunal shall submit a periodical report to the Assistant Registrar of this Court at Karachi Branch Registry, at the end of every month.
Q.M.H./M.A.K./G‑87/S
Order accordingly.