Pakistan Case Law
2003 PLC (C. S.) 1239

MUHAMMAD NAVEED IQBAL vs WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2003 PLC (C. S.) 1239
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No. 1280 of 2002
Date2003-06-12
Judge(s)Sh. Riaz Ahmed, C. J., Mian Muhammad Ajmal and Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi
Authored byMuhammad Nawaz Abbasi
ResultPetition dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

The petitioner, an employee of the Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA), challenged a judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The petitioner had been compulsorily retired from service following disciplinary proceedings under the Pakistan WAPDA (E&D) Rules, 1978. While the Tribunal set aside the retirement order and directed the petitioner's reinstatement, it refused to grant back-benefits. The petitioner sought leave to appeal under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, arguing that the denial of back-benefits was legally unjustified given the improper nature of his initial retirement. The Supreme Court observed that the Tribunal had exercised its discretion by leaving the issue of back-benefits open for determination by the relevant authority upon the conclusion of any departmental inquiry. Finding no question of law of public importance necessitating interference with the Tribunal's discretionary decision, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition for leave to appeal, thereby upholding the Tribunal's order regarding the withholding of back-benefits.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does the refusal of back-benefits by a Service Tribunal upon reinstatement constitute a question of law of public importance?
  • Can a Service Tribunal leave the determination of back-benefits to the concerned departmental authority upon reinstatement?
  • Is the Supreme Court of Pakistan required to interfere with the discretionary exercise of power by a Service Tribunal regarding back-benefits?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Pakistan WAPDA (E&D) Rules, 1978
  • Article 212(3), Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973
compulsory retirementback-benefitsservice tribunaldisciplinary proceedingsmisconductleave to appealWAPDA employees

' MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, J---The petitioner, an employee of Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) was proceeded against for the charge of misconduct under Pakistan WAPDA (E&D) Rules, 1978 and was awarded the punishment of compulsory retirement from service vide order dated 15-7-1999. The departmental appeal filed by the petitioner was not decided within the statutory period and he approached the Federal Service Tribunal for redressal of his grievance. The Tribunal having dilated upon the matter in detail, allowed the appeal vide judgment dated 7-5- 2002 and directed reinstatement of the petitioner in service without back-benefits.

2. The petitioner through this petition under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 has sought leave to appeal against the judgment of Service Tribunal to the extent of refusal of back-benefits.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that since the petitioner was compulsorily retired from service without any legal justification, depriving him from the legitimate right of earning of livelihood, therefore, withholding the back-benefits was not proper and legal.

4. The perusal of the judgment of the Tribunal reveals that the Tribunal having considered the question relating to the grant of back-benefits to the petitioner, left it open for decision by the concerned authority on conclusion of the departmental inquiry, if any, therefore, we are not, inclined to take any exception to the discretion exercised by the Tribunal and further no question of law of public importance is involved in this petition for interference of this Court. This petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.