PAKISTAN RAILWAYS vs GHULAM SARWAR
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against an order of a Service Tribunal. The core legal question presented is whether an appeal filed before the Tribunal was time-barred, given that it was directed against an order dated 6-2-1979, or alternatively, whether the appeal was incompetent due to the failure to specify the impugned order. The Supreme Court observed that the Service Tribunal had failed to expressly address these critical issues regarding limitation and competence. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal to examine these questions of law and procedure. As an interim measure, the operation of the impugned order passed by the Tribunal was stayed pending the final adjudication of the appeal. The judgment establishes that a Tribunal is legally obligated to expressly deal with and decide upon objections regarding the limitation period and the competency of an appeal before it, and failure to do so constitutes a legal error warranting appellate intervention.
- Is an appeal before a Service Tribunal competent if the impugned order is not specified?
- Does a failure by a Service Tribunal to address objections regarding limitation constitute a ground for granting leave to appeal?
- Can an appeal filed against an order dated 6-2-1979 be considered time-barred if filed on 13-5-1982?
ORDER
1. M.S.H. QURAISHI, J.--It is contended that if the appeal before the Tribunal was directed against order, dated 6-2-1979 refusing the grant of benefits claimed, then the appeal filed on 13-5-1982 was clearly the-barred and that if the appeal was directed against some other order, then as no such order has been specified, the appeal was not competent. These points have not been expressly dealt with by the Tribunal. Leave is granted. The operation of the impugned order shall be stayed.