ISHTIAQ AHMED vs THE MEMBER, FINANCE, RAILWAY BOARD, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD And 3 Others
This matter originated as a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, which had dismissed the petitioner's appeal regarding the withdrawal of advance increments as time-barred. The petitioner, an Upper Division Clerk in the Railways, had been granted four advance increments following his graduation. Although the department issued an order withdrawing these increments on September 25, 1989, the petitioner continued to receive them until February 1990. The core legal question was whether the limitation period for filing an appeal before the Service Tribunal should commence from the date of the withdrawal order or from the date the petitioner gained actual knowledge of the order, given that the order was never communicated to him. The Supreme Court found merit in the petitioner's contention that the order was not communicated, as evidenced by the continued payment of increments. Consequently, the Court held that the limitation period could not be strictly applied from the date of the order itself. The principle established is that an uncommunicated administrative order cannot be used to trigger the limitation period against an aggrieved party who remained unaware of its existence.
- Does the limitation period for an appeal against an administrative order commence from the date of the order or the date of its communication?
- Can an administrative order that was never communicated to the affected party be used to trigger the period of limitation for filing an appeal?
ORDER
1. WALI MUHAMMAD KHAN, J.---Ishtiaq Ahmed, petitioner herein, calls in question the judgment dated 26-4-1993 passed by the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, whereby his appeal against the order of the authority declining his prayer for restitution of advance increments withdrawn from him on 25-9-1989, was dismissed.
2. The facts of the case in a nutshell are that the petitioner graduated from the Sindh University on 2- 11-1981 while serving as Upper Division Clerk in the Railways, and on his application, four advance increments under the Incentive Scheme were granted to him with effect from 2-11-1981, the date on which he improved his qualifications which he received uptill February, 1990. Admittedly this concession was withdrawn vide order dated 25-9-1989 but the order was never communicated to him, so much so, that he was paid the increments even alongwith the pay of February paid to him in the month of March. According to him, he got knowledge of the order on 11-4-1990 when the increments had been deducted from his pay for the month of March. His representation having failed, he preferred appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal which was dismissed as time- barred.
3. We have heard Ch. Abdur Rehman, Advocate for the petitioner, and have perused the record of the case.
4. The documents placed on the file reveal that the department continued paying the increments up to the end of February, 1990 and, as such, there is force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the order dated 25-9-1989 through which the advance increments were withdrawn from the petitioner was never communicated to him.