SANAULLAH vs WAPDA
This is an appeal by leave against the order of the Federal Service Tribunal dated 8-8-1984, which dismissed the appellant meter-reader's service appeal. The appellant had been removed from service on 12-1-1983 under section 17(1-A) of the WAPDA Act. Leave was granted to examine whether the Service Tribunal could assume jurisdiction and interfere with WAPDA's orders given the ouster of jurisdiction under section 17(1-C) of the WAPDA Act. The Supreme Court noted that the question of the Tribunal's jurisdiction stood finally resolved by prior precedent. Finding no defect in the Tribunal's order—which had dismissed the appeal on the grounds of limitation and merits—the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal.
- Whether the Federal Service Tribunal has jurisdiction to interfere with orders of WAPDA in respect of persons employed under it in view of section 17(1-C) of the WAPDA Act?
- Can a service appeal be dismissed on the grounds of limitation and merits?
- Section 17(1-A), WAPDA Act
- Section 17(1-C), WAPDA Act
ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, J.--This is an appeal by leave against the order of the Federal Service Tribunal, dated 8-8-1984, whereby the appeal filed by Sanaullah was dismissed.
2. The appellant who was a meter-reader was removed from service under section 17(1-A) of the WAPDA Act on 12-1-1983. In the first instance he moved the departmental authorities and thereafter filed an appeal before the Service Tribunal on 9-3-1983 which was dismissed through the impugned order.
3. Leave in this case was granted to consider whether in view of the complete ouster of jurisdiction under section 17(1-C) of the WAPDA Act the learned Tribunal could assume jurisdiction and interfere with the orders of the WAPDA in respect of persons employed or serving under it.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case. As for the question of jurisdiction of the Tribunal, the same stands finally resolved by this Court in the case reported as WAPDA v. Muhammad Arshad Qureshi 1986 SCM R 18.
5. The appeal filed by the appellant before the Service Tribunal was dismissed on the question of limitation and on merits. The learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to convince us that the order of the Tribunal was in any way defective. The appeal thus has no merit and is dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.