NISARUL HAQ and another vs KARACHI ELECTRIC SUPPLY CORPORATION LTD. and another
This civil appeal was filed before the Supreme Court of Pakistan challenging an order of the Service Tribunal dated 31-12-1997, which had dismissed the appellants' appeals by referencing an earlier decision containing nineteen distinct propositions of law. The core legal question was whether the Tribunal's order constituted a valid, speaking order when it failed to specify which of the nineteen propositions applied to the appellants' specific cases. The Supreme Court held that the impugned order was not a speaking order, as it lacked any indication of which legal propositions were applicable to the appeals before it, notwithstanding the respondents' arguments regarding retrospectivity and limitation. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the cases back to the Service Tribunal for a fresh decision in accordance with law.
- Whether an order of the Service Tribunal can be sustained if it dismisses an appeal by mere reference to an earlier decision containing multiple propositions of law without specifying which proposition applies?
- Does a non-speaking order that fails to disclose the specific grounds of decision warrant a remand by the appellate court?
ORDER
1. ' Heard learned counsel for the parties. The impugned order dated 31-12-1997 is not a speaking order. The appeals filed by the appellants have been dismissed by the Hon'ble Service Tribunal in terms of its earlier decision in Service Appeal No,2638(K) of 1997 wherein the Tribunal formulated as many as 19 propositions of law for decision. There is no indication in the impugned order as to which of the nineteen propositions framed by the Hon'ble Tribunal were applicable to the appeals before it. Learned counsel for the respondents attempted to support the impugned order of the Tribunal contending that the appeals have been dismissed on the points of retrospectivity and limitation. It may be so but it does not appear from the impugned judgment. We accordingly set aside the impugned order of the Tribunal and remand the cases to the Tribunal for decision in accordance with law. No'order as to costs.