Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD FAROOQ SIDDIQUI VS Respondent: WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYHonorable Justice MOAZZAM HAYATSheikh Abdul Hameed,Muhammad Iqbal Khokhar
2006 P L C (C
2006 P L C (C.S.) 1124
[Federal Service Tribunal]
Before Moazzam Hayat and Jehan Zaib Burki, Members
MUHAMMAD FAROOQ SIDDIQUI
Versus
WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY through Chairman, WAPDA House, Lahore and another
Appeal No.692(L) (C.S.)/2003 decided on 24th September, 2004.
(a) Civil service---
----Move-over---Entitlement---Move-over claimed by employee w.e.f. 1-12-1988 was denied to him on the ground that penalty of withholding of increments for five years had been imposed upon him on 27-6-1991---Validity---Penalty imposed upon employee on 27-6-1991 was not relevant as his claim was for grant of move-over w.e.f. 1-12-1988 when penalty imposed on him was not in existence---Such penalty was no bar in considering the claim of employee for grant of move-over w.e.f. 1-12-1988---Move-over was also denied to employee on ground that another penalty of withholding of five increments was imposed on him---Said penalty admittedly was set aside on the very date from which employee had claimed move-over---Punishment/penalty which was set aside would not remain part of his service record and Authority should treat record of employee upto 1-12-1986 to be without any penalty---Authority was directed to decide claim of employee for grant of move-over w.e.f. 1-12-1988---Authority had contended that as employee who had come on deputation from other Department and was absorbed in the department, was in service of said other Department in the year 1987-1988, it was not responsibility of Authority to grant employee move-over w.e.f. 1-12-1988---Contention was repelled because once employee was absorbed in transferee department, all his claims relating to his previous service had to be finalized by transferee department and said finalization could be made in consultation with previous department.
(b) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)--
----S.4---Appeal---Limitation---Appeals relating to pays and allowances---Aggrieved civil servant had a continuing cause of action and for a continuing cause of action there was no fixed period of limitation and appeal could not be thrown away as time-barred.
Sheikh Abdul Hameed for Appellant.
Muhammad Iqbal Khokhar for Respondents with Safdar Mahmood Mehdi, Deputy Director as Departmental Representative.
Date of hearing: 24th September, 2004.