Ch. UMAR DIN vs GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN And Other
The petitioner, appointed as an Assistant in the Ministry of Production in 1972 and later transferred to the Ministry of Religious Affairs in 1976, challenged a seniority list assigning his seniority from the date of his transfer. His departmental representation was met with a letter stating his seniority was under determination in consultation with the Establishment Division. Subsequently, he filed an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal, which was dismissed as time-barred and on merits. Upon further petition before the Supreme Court, the Court held that the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the appeal as time-barred because the departmental letter relied upon by the petitioner was not a final appealable order. The Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of the petition while observing that the petitioner remained entitled to press for a final determination of his seniority by the Ministry since such a final decision had not yet been rendered.
- Whether an interim departmental letter regarding pending seniority determination constitutes a final appealable order under service laws?
- Is an appeal filed before the Federal Service Tribunal beyond the prescribed limitation period from the initial representation liable to be dismissed as time-barred?
- Does a dismissed time-barred service appeal preclude a civil servant from seeking a final determination of seniority where no final order has yet been issued?
ORDER
M.S.H. QURAISHI, J.-- The petitioner had been appointed as Assistant with effect from 13-11-1972 in the Ministry of Production. He was transferred to the Ministry of Religious Affairs in the same post with effect from 15-1)-1976. In the seniority list of Assistants in the latter Ministry issued on 5-6-1980, he was assigned seniority from that date, i.e., 15-11-1976. He made a representation against it on 16- 6-1980 claiming seniority from 13-11-1972. By letter, dated 14-7-1982 he was informed by the Ministry that "the case of his seniority is, however, being determined in consultation with the Establishment Division. The decision taken in the matter will be communicated to him in due course". He, thereupon, filed an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal on 25-11-1982, which was dismissed by the impugned order, dated 19-5-1984 on the ground of limitation, as also on merits.
2. The appeal of the petitioner was obviously the-barred as h had not filed the same within the period of limitation from making the representation. The petitioner, who personally argued the case before us, referred to the letter of the Ministry, dated 14-7-1982 to urge that limitation was to count from that date. But that letter, not being final order, was not appeal able. The Tribunal was, therefore, justifies in dismissing the appeal as the-.Barred, and as such no case is made out for interference in that regard. However, since a final determination of his seniority is yet to be made by the Ministry, he would be entitled to press for such determination notwithstanding the view taken by the Tribunal. With this observation the petition is dismissed.
Cited by 1 case
- SANA ULLAH ANJUM, INSPECTOR INTELLIGENCE BUREAU, ISLAMABAD vs DIRECTOR GENERAL, INTELLIGENCE BUREAU, ISLAMABAD 2014 PLJ Tr.C. (Services) 105