Present: Irshad Hasan Khan. Sh. Ijaz Nisar and Ch. Muhammad Aril

' IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, J.---This is an appeal, with the leave of the Court, against the judgment dated 28-10-1997 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), passed in Appeal No, 652(R) of 1997, filed by the appellant against the order dated 21-8- 1977 terminating his services.

2. The brief facts are that the appellant was appointed as Officer in the Pakistan International Airlines Corporation (P.I.A.C.) on 18-9-1975. His services were terminated on 21-8-1977. The grievance Petition No,435 of 1977, filed by him under section 25 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 was also dismissed by the Labour Court No, 1, Lahore vide order dated 31-1-1978, on the ground that he was not a workman. On appeal, the Punjab Labor Appellate Tribunal, Lahore vide judgment dated 7-8-1978 reinstated the appellant with back benefits. On respondents' Writ Petition No,4129 of 1978, the High Court set aside the order of the Labor Appellate Tribunal. The appellant challenged the aforesaid judgment of the High Court before this Court through Civil Appeal No,38 of 1979, which was dismissed vide judgment dated 3-5-1992. Review Petition No,76 of 1992 filed by him was also rejected on 27-10-1992. The appellant again approached the Tribunal vide Appeal No,652(R) of 1997 on 4-9-1997, in view of insertion of section 2-A in the Service Tribunals Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), which was incorporated by Act No,XVII of 1997 and made effect from 10-6-1997. For facility of reference the above provision is reproduced below:-- "2-A. Service under certain corporations, etc. To the service of Pakistan.---Service under any authority, corporation. Body or organisation established by or under a Federal Law or which is owned or controlled by the Federal Government or in which the Federal Government has a controlling share or interest is hereby declared to be service of Pakistan and every person holding a post under such authority, corporation, body or organization shall be deemed to be a civil servant for the purposes of this Act."

3. Leave to appeal was granted to consider the affect of Act XVII of 1997, dated 10th June, 1997, introducing amendment in the Service Tribunals Act, 1973 on the service rights of the appellant and maintainability of his service appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal. A similar point was considered in Civil Appeal No, 153 of 1997 whereby this Court, after considering the cases of Adnan Afzal v. Capt. Sher Afzal (PLD 1969 SC 187), Malik Gul Hasan & Co. v. Allied Bank of Pakistan (1996 SCM R 237), Federation of Pakistan v. Muhammad Siddiq (PLD 1981 SC 249) and The Chairman, P.I.A.C. v. Nasim Malik (PLD 1990 SC 951), held:- "A perusal of the above-quoted extract from the judgment clearly shows that the matter relating to the remedy, the mode of trial, the manner of taking evidence and forms of action which are all matters pertaining to procedure. Reliance has also been placed on Federation of Pakistan v.

Muhammad Siddiq (PLD 1981 SC 249) which is in line with the view taken in the above judgment.

Subsequent judgments of this Court referred hereinabove are also in line with the above judgment in the case of Adnan Afzal v. Capt. Sher Afzal (supra)."

' In the precedent case this Court held that the Tribunal was not ju dinon-suiting the appellant therein as on 10-9-1977 when the appellant presented his appeal before the Service Tribunal, admittedly, the Tribunal had the jurisdiction in the manner.

4. The controversy raised herein is in pari material with the controversy raised in Civil Appeal No, 1513 of 1997 (ibid). After the insertion of section 2-A of the Act, the appellant admittedly filed the appeal before the Tribunal on 3-9-1997 i,e, after the date when section 2-A of the Act became effective from 10-6-1997. Thus, visualized, following the rule of consistency, we hold that the Tribunal was wrong in non-suiting the appellant, in that, the Tribunal had the jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the grievance raised before it. The question whether the appellant is entitled to any relief is a question relating to the merits of the case. Of course, the Tribunal would decide the same in the light of the pleadings of the parties and the submissions made on their behalf, justly, fairly and in accordance with law. We would, therefore, allow the appeal and remit the case to the Tribunal for decision afresh on merits and in accordance with law, with no order as to costs.