WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs AJMAL HAMEED
This petition for leave to appeal challenges an order of the Federal Service Tribunal regarding the termination of the respondent, a former temporary Junior Engineer with the Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA). The respondent was granted leave for Umra but failed to return to duty upon its expiration, despite warnings. Subsequently, his services were removed under Section 17(1-A) of the WAPDA Act, 1958. Following his removal, the respondent submitted his resignation and remained inactive regarding his employment status for approximately three years before appealing to the C.M.L.A. and subsequently the Ministry of Water and Power, which rejected his appeal. The Federal Service Tribunal later issued a favorable order for the respondent. The petitioner contends that the appeal before the Tribunal was time-barred due to the significant delay in challenging the termination. The Supreme Court finds that the case requires consideration regarding the limitation issue and grants leave to appeal.
- Whether an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal is maintainable when the aggrieved party has delayed challenging the termination order for several years?
- Does the failure to agitate a service termination for a significant period render an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal time-barred?
- Section 17(1-A), WAPDA Act 1958
ORDER
' ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, J.--This is a petition for leave to appeal against the order of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, dated 29-5-1984/14-6-1984.
2. Ajmal Hameed respondent was appointed as a temporary junior Engineer on 26-8-1974. He was sanctioned ex-Pakistan leave for three months effective from 1st April, 1976 or the date of availing for performing Umra and visit to holy shrines. The leave was actually availed of from 30-6-1976 and was to expire on 30th September, 1976 when he sent a telegram on 2-10-1976 for extension of leave from Tehran. This extension being in violation of his own undertaking was refused and he was informed by registered letter on 9-10-1976 that in case he did not join service within fifteen days, his services would be terminated. The respondent did not rejoin the service, therefore, vide letter dated 2-6-1977 he was served with a thirty days' notice whereafter his removal under section 17(1-A) of the WAPDA Act, 1958, was communicated and it became effective from 1-7-1977.
3. The respondent then submitted his resignation which was received by the relevant authority on 3-6-1977 and it was after three long years that he wrote a letter to the C.M.L.A. Which was sent for disposal to the Ministry of Water and Power on 1-4-1981. This appeal was also rejected on 15-9-1981.
From the above order the respondent was successful in obtaining a favourable order from the Federal Service Tribunal on 29-5-1984.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. He vehemently contended that the appeal before the Tribunal was hopelessly barred by time in that after submitting his resignation which was received by the relevant authority on 3-6-1977 the respondent did not agitate the matter for a considerably long time, therefore, the learned Tribunal has legally erred in ignoring this legal infirmity in the appeal before it.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner we think the case requires consideration. We, therefore grant leave. Security Rs,2,000.
' Leave to .