MUHAMMAD BOOTA vs WAPDA and others
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, which dismissed the petitioner's appeal challenging his retirement from service by WAPDA. The petitioner, formerly an Assistant Lineman, contested his retirement, arguing he had not reached the age of superannuation based on his service book, which recorded his birth year as 1945. However, the Tribunal observed conflicting evidence regarding the petitioner's date of birth, noting three different dates: 1945 in the service book, 26-12-1946 in a school leaving certificate, and 1-7-1928 in the WAPDA employee list. The Tribunal evaluated these documents and found the service book entry unreliable, ultimately concluding that the retirement was valid based on the date of birth recorded in the WAPDA list. The Supreme Court held that the determination of the petitioner's correct date of birth constituted a question of fact, which was within the Tribunal's jurisdiction to decide. Finding no substantial question of law of public importance, the Court refused to grant leave to appeal.
- Is the determination of an employee's correct date of birth a question of fact to be decided by the Service Tribunal?
- Does a dispute regarding an employee's date of birth constitute a substantial question of law of public importance under Article 212 of the Constitution?
- Article 212, Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
' AJ MAL MIAN, J. ---This is a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment dated 16-2-1993 passed by the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal, in Appeal No, 159(L) of 1992, filed by the petitioner, who was serving as an Assistant Lineman in WAPDA at the relevant time, against the order dated 14-3-1992, whereby the petitioner was retired from service with effect from 30-6-1988, dismissing the same. The petitioner has, therefore, filed the present petition for leave to appeal.
2. In support of the above petition, Malik Mukhtar Hussain Awan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, has vehemently contended that WAPDA was not justified in retiring the petitioner from service as he had not attained the age of superannuation for the reason that in the service book, his date of birth given was 1945.
3. It appears that there were three dates of birth of the petitioner before the Tribunal i,e. 1945 in the service book, 26-12-1946 in the alleged school leaving certificate and 1-7-1928 in the list of WAPDA employees. The Tribunal has perused the above documents and found that 1945 mentioned in the service book was not reliable for the reason recorded in the impugned judgment. It also did not place reliance on the above date of birth given in the school leaving certificate. If we were to take 1- 7-1928 as the date of birth of the petitioner, then he was rightly retired.
4. In any case, the question, what was the petitioner's correct date of birth, was a question of fact which could have been decided by the Tribunal. The above petition does not involvement any substantial question of law of public importance in terms of clause (3) of Article 212 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan warranting grant of leave. Leave is, accordingly, refused.