Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: NOOR MUHAMMAD VS Respondent: SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
1997 P L C (C
1997 P L C (C.S.) 1219
[Supreme Court of Pakistan]
Present: Zia Mahmood Mirza and Khalil‑ur‑Rehman Khan, JJ
NOOR MUHAMMAD
versus
THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER and another
Civil Petition No. 1528‑L of 1996, decided on 18th March, 1997.
(On appeal from the judgment dated 11‑4‑1996 of the Federal Service Tribunal passed in Appeal No. 384‑L/95).
West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act (XXXI of 1958)‑‑‑‑
‑‑‑‑S. 17(1‑B)‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)‑‑‑Employee of WAPDA‑‑‑ Compulsory retirement from service‑‑‑Employee's departmental appeal was accepted to the extent that he was reinstated in service but period intervening between his compulsory retirement and reinstatement was treated as extraordinary leave without pay and without back benefits‑‑‑Employee's appeal before Service Tribunal claiming back benefits for period in question, did not meet with success‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Employee's contention was that impugned order of Appellate Authority withholding pay and back benefits for the period during which his appeal remained pending was wholly unjustified; that his appeal having been accepted, he was entitled to all back benefits from the date of his compulsory retirement up to the date of his re instatement‑‑‑Leave to appeal to Supreme Court was granted to consider contentions raised by employee.
Hafiz Tariq Nasim, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents
Date of hearing: 18th March, 1997
ORDER
ZIA MAHMOOD MIRZA, J. ‑‑‑Petitioner, a Lineman‑I in WAPDA was compulsorily retired from service vide order dated 22‑5‑1993. He filed departmental appeal on 11‑7‑1993 which was accepted by the Chairman Area Electricity Board, Gujranwala vide order dated 2‑11‑1995 whereby the petitioner was reinstated in service but the period intervening between his compulsory retirement and reinstatement was treated as extraordinary leave without pay and without back benefits. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner challenged the refusal of the appellate authority to grant him pay and back benefits for the period in question in an appeal before the Service Tribunal but with no better result as his appeal has been dismissed by the learned Service. Tribunal vide judgment dated 11‑4‑1996/7‑2‑1996. Petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal.
2. Learned counsel appearing in support of this petition has submitted that the petitioner filed the departmental appeal within two months of his compulsory retirement. The appeal was, however, not decided by the competent authority for a pretty long time. Petitioner, therefore, invoked The writ jurisdiction of the High Court to seek a direction for disposal of his appeal which direction was issued by the High Court on 1‑12‑1994. Notwithstanding the order of the High Court, the appellate authority in the department failed to decide the petitioner's appeal. Petitioner, therefore, had to approach the High Court once more for initiating contempt proceedings against the departmental authority. It was only thereafter that his appeal was disposed of/accepted by the appellate authority on 2‑11‑1995. Basing himself on these facts, the learned counsel sought to contend that the impugned order of the appellate authority withholding the pay and back benefits for the period during which petitioner's appeal remained pending with him ‑as wholly unjustified. In the submission of learned counsel, the appeal of the petitioner having been accepted, he was entitled to all the back benefits from the date of his compulsory retirement upto the date of his reinstatement
3. The aforenoted contention of the learned counsel needs consideration. Leave to appeal is, therefore, granted to the petitioner and it is directed that since the matter relates to the emoluments of the petitioner, appeal may be heard on the present record within three months. Parties, of course, are at liberty to file any documents which they wish to bring on record.
A. A. /N-1/S Leave granted.