Al Wakeelo logo

Al Wakeelo

Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty

Initializing Secure Chambers

1991 PLC(CS) 823

MUHAMMAD SAFDAR VS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING

Petitioner: MUHAMMAD SAFDAR VS Respondent: SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTINGHonorable Justice Syed Ally Madad ShahCh. Rashid Ahmad,Niaz Ahmad Khan

Court: FEDERAL-SERVICE-TRIBUNAL

Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

1991 P L C (C

1991 P L C (C.S.) 823

[Federal Service Tribunal]

Present: Syed Ally Madad Shah, Chairman and Rasheeduddin Arshad Member

MUHAMMAD SAFDAR

Versus

SECRETARY MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING and others

Appeal No. 54(K) of 1985, decided on 28th February, 1989.

Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)---

----S.4---Appeal---Maintainability---Appellant who was not a civil servant but was removed from service claiming pensionary benefits---Appeal of appellant was not maintainable.

Ch. Rashid Ahmad for Appellant. Niaz Ahmad Khan for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 28th February, 1989.

JUDGMENT

SYED ALLY MADAD SHAH (CHAIRMAN).--Appellant Muhammad Safdar, who was a - Laboratory Assistant in the Directorate of Films and Publications, Government of Pakistan, has preferred this appeal for getting pensionary benefits. His services were terminated earlier. He had preferred Appeal No. 73 (K)/83 before this Tribunal. The appeal was dismissed vide judgment dated 27-11-1984, on the grounds that the appeal was time-barred and the appellant was not a civil servant within the definition of the term in the Civil Servants Act, 1973. However, he made an application to the Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Islamabad on 5-1-1985 for pensionary benefits. Failing to get any orders, he filed this appeal on 4-5-1985.

2. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant. He states that no appeal was preferred against the judgment of this Tribunal in Appeal No. 73 (K)/83, which was dismissed on the ground that the appellant was not a civil servant. That being the position the appellant cannot maintain this appeal before us. Even otherwise, there is no order which could be appealed against in this appeal and, therefore, the appeal cannot be maintained.

3. For the reasons recorded above, we dismiss the appeal as not maintainable.

M.Y.H./567/Sr.F Appeal dismissed.

Related Legal Research & Directories