PAKISTAN AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH COUNCIL vs Dr. Mirza BARJEES BAIG And Other
This petition for leave to appeal challenges a Lahore High Court order directing the Pakistan Agricultural Research Council to grant pay and allowances to a Scientific Officer for the period he remained abroad on Extraordinary Leave (EOL) for higher studies. The respondent had sought parity of treatment with another employee, Dr. Waqar Malik, who received such benefits. The High Court accepted the respondent's petition and ordered the Council to provide the requested benefits. The petitioner, the Pakistan Agricultural Research Council, argued before the Supreme Court that the dispute concerned the terms and conditions of service of the respondent. Consequently, the petitioner contended that under the newly-inserted Section 2-A of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973, the High Court lacked the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the petition or grant the relief sought. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to consider the jurisdictional question regarding the applicability of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973, in matters involving the terms and conditions of service of employees of statutory bodies, while maintaining an interim order in favor of the petitioner.
- Does the High Court have jurisdiction to adjudicate service matters of employees of statutory bodies following the insertion of Section 2-A of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973?
- Can a High Court grant relief regarding terms and conditions of service in a constitutional petition when a specialized tribunal has jurisdiction?
- Section 2-A, Service Tribunals Act 1973
ORDER
IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, J.- This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the order dated 1-12- 1998 of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, passed in Writ Petition No. 453 of 1998.
2. Brief facts are that the private respondent herein is a Scientific Officer in Pakistan Agricultural Research Council, Islamabad (hereinafter referred to as the Council. He was sent abroad for higher studies/Ph.D. With effect from 25-12-1989 to 29-6-1996 and this period was treated as on Extraordinary Leave (EOL) by the council). He was not paid his pay and allowances for the above period. Later, he came to know that one Dr. Waqar Malik was, in similar circumstances, granted his pay and allowances for the period he remained abroad, treating his E.O.L. As on duty. He also applied tor same relief but his request was turned down.
3. Being aggrieved, the private respondent approached the High Court through a Constitution petition seeking extension of same treatment to him as was meted out to Dr. Waqar Malik in similar circumstances by treating the period of his stay abroad as on duty and consequential relief thereof. The learned High Court accepted the writ petition and directed the Council, petitioners herein, to pay the requisite pay and allowances and other benefits within seven days from the passing of the impugned order as had been done in the case of Dr. Waqar Malik and several others.
4. Messrs Fazal Elahi Siddiqui and Abdul Karim Kundi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners argued that the controversy raised in this petition related to the terms and conditions of service of the respondent, therefore, in view of the newly-inserted Section 2-A of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973, the High Court had no jurisdiction to grant the relief prayed for by the respondent.
5. Leave to appeal is granted to consider the above points. Meanwhile, interim order dated 16-2- 1999, shall continue1 till the final disposal of the appeal, The Office is directed to fix this appeal alongwith the other connected appeals, if any, within six months, subject to the order of Hon'ble Chief Justice.