NAZIR AHMAD AKHTAR vs DIRECTOR GENERAL OF SOIL SURVEY OF PAKISTAN
The petitioner sought leave to appeal against a judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, which had dismissed his service appeal on the grounds of being time-barred. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioner's appeal was filed within the limitation period, given the circumstances surrounding his appointment and subsequent reversion. The petitioner contended that his appointment was regular and not tied to the T.S.T. Scheme, and that he had awaited the final approval of the competent authority before challenging his reversion. The Supreme Court observed that similar contentions regarding the nature of appointments and the calculation of limitation periods were already under consideration in other pending civil petitions. Consequently, the Court held that the issues raised required detailed examination and granted leave to appeal. The Court further ordered that the status quo be maintained in the interim and directed that the matter be heard alongside the related pending appeals to ensure consistency in adjudication.
- Does the pendency of similar legal contentions in other petitions warrant the grant of leave to appeal?
- Can a service appeal be considered timely if it is filed after the final notification of a reversion order by the competent authority?
ORDER
SAIDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, J.---The petitioner, who is appearing in person, is seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of Federal Service Tribunal dated 16-3-1995 whereby service appeal of the petitioner was dismissed as the-barred.
On a similar question as is canvassed in the present case, leave has been granted by this Court in Civil Petitions Nos. 1038 to 1041 of 1995 to consider the following contentions:- "Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that they were selected against the posts advertised by the Federal Public Service Commission, and were posted as such since 1986; neither in the letters of their appointment nor in the advertisement, the petitioners' appointment was notified against the posts in T.S.T Scheme. The petitioners held regular appointments with no reference to the T.S.T Scheme, therefore, they could not have been reverted with termination of the scheme. It was further submitted that the petitioners had waited till the final approval of the competent Authority. As the approval of their reversion was notified to the petitioners on 25-10- 1994, appeal filed before the Federal Service Tribunal on 23-11-1994 were within the .
5. The contentions raised by the learned counsel for petitioners need consideration. Leave to appeal is, therefore, granted. Status quo to continue in the meanwhile."
In view of the above leave granting order we grant leave in this petition as well. This matter will also be heard alongwith appeals arising from Petitions Nos. 1038 to 1041 of 1995.