WAPDA vs MUHAMMAD SABIR
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal filed by the Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) against an order of the Federal Service Tribunal. The respondent, an Assistant Lineman, was dismissed from service for unauthorized absence. After his grievance petition was returned by the Labour Court for lack of jurisdiction, he approached the Federal Service Tribunal, which upheld the finding of misconduct but mitigated the penalty from dismissal to the stoppage of three increments. The core legal question before the Supreme Court is whether the Federal Service Tribunal possessed the jurisdiction to entertain the respondent's appeal given that he had failed to exhaust the departmental appellate remedy available against the Executive Engineer's dismissal order. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine the applicability of the statutory bar contained in the Service Tribunals Act, specifically regarding the requirement to exhaust departmental remedies before approaching the Tribunal. The Court held that the matter requires further consideration to determine if the Tribunal's intervention was legally competent under the governing statute, thereby setting the stage for interpreting the mandatory nature of departmental appeals.
- Does the Federal Service Tribunal have jurisdiction to entertain an appeal if the aggrieved employee failed to exhaust the departmental appellate remedy?
- Is the filing of a departmental appeal a mandatory prerequisite under the Service Tribunals Act 1973 before approaching the Federal Service Tribunal?
- Section 4(1), Service Tribunals Act 1973
ORDER
' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--The respondent was serving the petitioner authority as an Assistant Lines- man. On the charge of unauthorised absence from duty departmental proceedings were taken against him and he was dismissed from service by the Executive Engineer. He served a grievance notice upon the Executive Engineer but when he failed to elicit any response to the notice, he filed a grievance petition before the local Labour Court. The grievance petition was returned to him on account of lack of jurisdiction. He then filed an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal. The learned Tribunal found that the charge of unauthorised absence had been established but reduced the penalty of dismissal from service to stoppage of three increments without cumulative effect. The petitioner authority seeks leave to appeal from the order of the learned Tribunal.
2. In support of this petition, it is inter alia contended that a departmental appeal was available to the respondent from the order of the Executive Engineer. He did not avail this remedy. That being so, as provided by proviso (a) to section 4 (1), Service Tribunals Act the Tribunal was not competent to entertain his appeal. To consider this and the other questions, leave to appeal is granted. The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with permission to the parties to file additional documents, if any. The interim order made on 17-4-1989 should continue during the pendency of this appeal. 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.