Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: NASEER AHMAD UPPAL VS Respondent: WATER & POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
1987 S C M R 1731
1987 S C M R 1731
Present: Abdul Kadir Shaikh, S. A. Nusrat and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ
NASEER AHMAD UPPAL‑‑Petitioner
versus
WATER & POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY‑‑Respondent
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.52‑Q of 1986, heard on 12th April, 1987.
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑
‑‑‑Art. .212(3)‑‑West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act (XXXI of 1958), S. 17(1‑A)‑‑Removal from service under S.17(1‑A) of Act (XXXI of 1958)‑‑Order set aside in appeal with direction that intervening period for which petitioner ,remained out of service be treated as extraordinary leave without pay‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider contentions that Service Tribunal had failed to follow principle laid down by Supreme Court in an earlier case and that in view of impugned direction of Tribunal, petitioner despite having earned sufficient leave during period of 21 years' service to cover intervening period, would not be able to avail of same and avoid break in service for pensionary benefits.
P L D 1970 S C 415 ref.
Raja M. Afsar, Advocate Supreme Court and Iftikhar Muhammad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 12th April, 1987.
ORDER
ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.‑‑This is a petition for leave to appeal from the judgment of Federal Service Tribunal dated 4‑8‑1986 by which while allowing petitioner's appeal against the order of his removal from service under section 17 (1‑A) of WAPDA Act and setting aside that order with the result directing petitioner's reinstatement in service, the Service Tribunal further directed that the intervening period for which he remained out of service shall be treated as extraordinary leave without pay.
Petitioner feels aggrieved by the direction regarding treatment of the aforesaid period as extra‑ordinary leave without pay, and Mr. Raja M. Afsar learned counsel appearing for him submits that the Service Tribunal has failed to follow the principles laid down by this Court in this behalf in the case reported as P L D 1970 S C 415.
Learned counsel further submits that during the period of 211 years service, petitioner has already earned sufficient leave with pay which would cover tile aforesaid intervening period, but in view of the impugned direction of the Service Tribunal, petitioner will not be able to avail of the aforesaid earned leave and avoid break in servant for pensionary benefits.
The submissions made by the learned counsel deserve consideration. WE, therefore, grant leave and allow the petition.
Appeal will be heard on the present record, but it is open to the parties to file additional documents, if any.
M.I./N‑25/S Leave granted