MUHAMMAD NAZIR MALIK vs S.A.T. WASTI and others
These appeals arose from the dismissal of the appellants' service appeals by the Service Tribunal on the ground of limitation. In the first case, the appellant's civil suit was pending when Section 2-A was inserted into the Service Tribunals Act 1973. In the second case, the appellant's petition before the Labour Court was returned for want of jurisdiction, after which he approached the Service Tribunal. The Service Tribunal dismissed both appeals as time-barred, holding that the appellants should have approached the Tribunal within six months under Section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act 1973. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that Section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act 1973 was inapplicable. Instead, the appellants became entitled to file appeals before the Service Tribunal only upon the abatement of their respective civil suit and labour petition. Consequently, the provisions of Section 6, and not Section 4, of the Service Tribunals Act 1973 governed the limitation period. The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the impugned orders, and remanded the cases to the Service Tribunal for decision in accordance with law.
- Whether Section 4 or Section 6 of the Service Tribunals Act 1973 applies to appeals filed before the Service Tribunal upon the abatement of pending civil suits or labour petitions?
- Does the insertion of Section 2-A in the Service Tribunals Act 1973 automatically abate pending civil suits, and what is the relevant limitation provision for filing subsequent appeals?
- Can an appeal before the Service Tribunal be dismissed as time-barred under Section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act 1973 if the matter was previously pending before a civil court or labour court prior to the abatement?
- Section 2-A, Service Tribunals Act 1973
- Section 4, Service Tribunals Act 1973
- Section 6, Service Tribunals Act 1973
ORDER
1. ' SAIDUZAMAN SIDDIQUI, C.J.---The appellants and their counsel are called but they are absent. We have heard the learned counsel for the respondents. In the first-mentioned appeal the appellant was dismissed from service on 7-2-1995. His departmental appeal was rejected on 1-3-1995. He filed Review Application which was also rejected on 12-4-1995. He then filed a Civil Suit on 3-9-1995 which was pending on 10th June, 1997 when section 2-A was added in the Service Tribunals Act, 1973.
2. ' In the other appeal the appellant was promoted as Senior Assistant Grade-II Officer with effect from 27-3-1996. His claim before the departmental authority was that he should have been promoted from the date when his juniors were promoted. He accordingly filed departmental appeal and then filed petition before the Labour Court which was returned for want of jurisdiction on 5-9-1998. He then preferred appeal before the Service Tribunal on 3-10-1998.
3. ' Both the appeals were dismissed on the ground that they were time-barred. Hon'ble Tribunal took the view that the appellants should have approached the Tribunal within six months under section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973. Section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act 1973, was clearly not applicable to the present cases. The appellants became entitled to file appeals before the Service Tribunal only on abatement of their suit/ petition before the Civil Court and the Labour Tribunal.
4. ' The provisions of section 6 and not section 4 would apply in such circumstances.
5. ' We accordingly allow these appeals, set aside the impugned orders and remand the cases to the Tribunal to decide the same in accordance with law. No order as to costs.
Cited by 4 cases
- MANAGING DIRECTOR, SUI SOUTHERN GAS COMPANY LTD., KARACHIMUHAMMAD TA_1650169d 2003 PLD Supreme Court 724
- MUHAMMAD TAHIR ACHAKZAI and others MANAGING DIRECTOR, SUI SOUTHERN G_ee427567 2003 PLC (C.S.) 796
- Messrs PAKISTAN STATE OIL CO. LTD. vs MUHAMAMD TAHIR KHAN and others 2001 PLC (C.S.) 591
- Messrs PAKISTAN STATE OIL CO. LTD. ISHFAQ HUSSAIN FAZLE MANSOOR and othersALLAH DINO MIRANI and 2001 PLD Supreme Court 980